todd wrote:
just some ideas and something i'd like to help build and test to see whether or not it actually improves performance or not. I mean maybe you're right maybe just compressing
the xml files yields sufficient amount of performance gain on the disk io side that it makes up for any extra overhead added for decompressing the files. At any rate i think its
something interesting to think about.
I've write a simple test case that uses glade_parser_parse_file() for load xml. The test shows that performance penalty for compressed files is less than 10% for fast machines (can't reach a slow box right now). Gzipped files rule when they're stored on slow (flash, remote) drives and when they're not cached in RAM (first application launch).
Maybe I'll test this stuff with heavily optimized libraries (-O3, -march=, etc...).
I've attached the test case. It contain gzipped xml file (26266 lines, 1027500 bytes). Files "p?-*" contain some results.
Olexiy
I ran this on my p4 and got these numbers:
plain text/xml is 7% faster, difference: 15ms (15069us)
doesn't this argue in favor of providing a binary format for libglade that would offer faster load times then compressed files and plain text files?
-todd
begin:vcard fn:Todd Fisher n:Fisher;Todd email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://severna.homeip.net version:2.1 end:vcard
