On 01/05/2013 06:57 AM, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
Greetings.
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:57:21 +0100 Charlie Kester<corky1...@comcast.net> wrote:
On 12/29/2012 12:20 AM, Kai Hendry wrote:
Initially I was worried that the newer version was somehow slower to
the version I was running before.
Not slower, but definitely bigger. The stripped executable is now 16x
the size of that from the 0.3 release -- thanks, no doubt, to these font
caches, which are implemented as static arrays.
That’s only partially true. The array is adding 48k, which another patch
series will reduce. Most of the additional memory usage is due to the
font handling. So the inability of font handling in X.org/Fontconfig is
the reason why too much has to be done over and over again. Yet another
abstraction layer would hide it but waste the same resources.
Yes.
I took a closer look at the stripped executables using objdump, and most
of the increase is in the .rodata section:
v0.3: 0cach (3,244)
latest git: 16934h (92,468)
But unless I'm mistaken, the static arrays go in the .data or .bss
section (which also increased, but not by 16x.)
So I must take back the allegation that the caches are the main culprit
here.
