On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 19:13 +0100, Jamie McCracken wrote: > Matthias Clasen wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 18:21 +0100, Jamie McCracken wrote: > > > >>The culprit is pretty obviously GConf which is why I'm glad DConf is > >>considering having a DB backend to address this. The short term fixes > >>which Havoc has already suggested (moving the schema crap sideways and > >>possibly mmap'ing some things) should cut some of that down but only a > >>properly indexed database will give you both speed and memory efficiency > >>(mmap'ing stuff is obviously wasteful memory wise). > >> > > > > > > mmapping normally saves memory, since you can share the map between all > > apps, and only actually needed pages are in ram. The only thing wasted > > by a big mmap cache is address space, which is cheap. > > Not really comparable to a DB which is designed for the cases where you > need good random access performance but cant afford to bung it all in > memory. > > EG if you have a million records in GConf you will end up with a pretty > large mutli megagbyte chunk of memory being allocated.
If we have a million records in GConf, we will need brain surgery before an DB backend for an hypothetical configuration system. --- Bastien Nocera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list