Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Carman wrote: >> >> I tried it, and it does help some. In my very unscientific test[1] it >> ran about 20% faster. The size of the db file (on disk) was about 75% >> smaller. > > Thanks. 20% is certainly useful.
I ran some more tests, some of which might be more significant: time(sec) db size (kB) peak RAM (MB) no coverage 15 --- ~ 10 Data::Dumper+eval 246 245 ~ 23.4 Storable 190 60 ~ 19.7 no storage 184 --- ~ 18 The 'no coverage' run is to provide a baseline. For the 'no storage' test, I ran using Devel::Cover, but modified the read() and write() methods to be essentially no-ops. I did this to isolate the time overhead of coverage itself, as opposed to the time spent reading and writing the db. Storable looks like it's performing pretty well, with only a small overhead. Eventually, I think that a transition to a real database (where you can read/write only the portions of interest) would be good. -mjc