[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       perl5-porters
Subject:    RE: [perl #50352] Perl 5.10 Storable extremely slow for large trees of data
From:       "Steve Hay" <SteveHay () planit ! com>
Date:       2008-01-30 15:04:56
Message-ID: 1B32FF956ABF414C9BCE5E487A1497E70132B2AB () ukmail02 ! planit ! group
[Download RAW message or body]


OK, your 3.23s compares with my 2.7s for 5.10.0+2.18, and I get 0.7s for
5.6.0+1.0.10, which compares with your 0.87s. (All using the system
malloc.)
 
So your 5.6.0 set-up never gave you times like those I've seen with
perl's malloc anyway. The difference that you're seeing is similar to
what I saw between 5.6.2 and 5.10.0 (both using Storable 2.18): 0.9s up
to 2.7s. I've no idea what causes this difference, but if you can live
without the fork() emulation then switching to a perl built with perl's
malloc definitely gives a big speed-up in both 5.6 and 5.10.

________________________________

From: Clinton Pierce [mailto:clintp@gmail.com] 
Sent: 30 January 2008 14:35
To: perlbug-followup@perl.org
Cc: Steve Hay
Subject: Re: [perl #50352] Perl 5.10 Storable extremely slow for large
trees of data


Using the supplied data file:

C:\temp>\perl\bin\perl.exe xmledit.pl
Retrieved.
Benchmark: timing 20 iterations of Storable...
  Storable:  3 wallclock secs ( 1.45 usr +  1.78 sys =  3.23 CPU) @
6.20/s (n=20)

C:\temp>\perl_560\bin\perl.exe xmledit.pl
Retrieved.
Benchmark: timing 20 iterations of Storable...
  Storable:  1 wallclock secs ( 0.87 usr +  0.00 sys =  0.87 CPU) @
22.88/s (n=20)

Both Perls were from ActiveState.  

5.6 Build 623's Storable had to have come from PPM -- we wouldn't have
hand-built a production version of Storable or Perl. 





[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]