On 7/10/06, Nathaniel Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 08:17:36PM +0200, Thomas Moschny wrote: The point of having an upper-limit is to put an upper bound on how much memory monotone has to use. 1M seems a bit large for this purpose, and I'm astonished if you actually have to go to 1M to get the benefit. Could someone run timings at different block sizes and pick one that gives most of the speed benefit without being huge?
Note that this interface will probably be run on a pipe and different block sizes will have a different impact on different operating systems (and even between versions). I remember there was a paper on the drastic differences in speed between the pipe handling on Windows 2000 and XP for different block sizes. Maybe someone can recollect where that paper was... Best regards, ~Nuno Lucas
-- Nathaniel
_______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
