Tom Wijsman <tom...@gentoo.org> writes: >> I am curious about the slowness of emerge. > > Try a --backtrack=0 approach, I no longer need to increase it. :)
on a random box: time emerge --backtrack=0 -pe @world [...] real 0m30.016s user 0m29.268s sys 0m0.704s time emerge -pe @world [...] real 0m35.037s user 0m30.824s sys 0m1.136s not a big difference? >> How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part in >> C/C++, or ideally, borrowing the counterpart from paludis? How >> feasible is that? > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomwij/files/portage-2.2.7-python-2.7-backtrack-0.png > http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomwij/files/portage-2.2.7-python-2.7-backtrack-0-hot.png > http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomwij/files/portage-2.2.7-python-3.3-backtrack-0.png > > (hot is the hotshot profiler, it internally checks on the line level > instead; 3.3's profiler is obstructed by module loading, no idea why) Great! That's what I am looking for.
pgp2YrVrzkrgG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
