I will make the measurement on the initial machine, will work with different files and post the results.
The code I used is little different, the while loop is allocating new memory for each chunk: while( (res = read(fd, buffer, chunk_size) ) > 0) { buffer = (char *)malloc(chunk_size); count ++; } I removed the line, but memory allocation is not influencing that much... if I work with rel. huge chunks> 5000 Misi On Jun 17, 12:47 pm, "Antonio Colombo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Misi, > > your tests still are not in the "ideal" conditions, unless there > > are reboots after the creation of each new test file. The creation > > of the file of course leaves a lot of buffers in memory. > > In my tests I used existing files I had not been using at all > > from boot time. > > . > > Apart from that, your program and "grep" do not really need > > to have in their private memory (not in the Unix buffer) more > > than one "little piece" of the file. Of course vim needs and uses > > its private memory to hold the whole file. To make things even, > > you should modify your program in order to read each new > > chunk of the file in a different piece of memory, thus having > > them all in memory at the same time at the end of the run. > > I expect the difference to be noticeable (unless the memory > > of the HP-UX server is gigantic). > > Cheers, Antonio > > PS Off Topic: I like more "ciao" as a throw away file name. ;-) > > -- > /||\ | Antonio Colombo > / || \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > / () \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (___||___) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---