Hi Achim, this is an interesting experiment, thank you!
I think it would also be interesting to use elp to see which function are taking up the non-linear time. - Carsten On 27.4.2013, at 21:28, Achim Gratz <strom...@nexgo.de> wrote: > I've been looking at export runtimes for large documents with the new > exporter. The example I've used is the orgmanual.org from Tom. I first > exported each subtree standalone, then the document as a whole to > texinfo. The startup of Emacs takes about 1 s of user time and 1.5 s of > wall time, these have not been subtracted in the table below. The table > shows the individual runtimes for each subtree export, their total and > the last line is for the export of the full document. > > | user | sys | wall | util | > |---------+-------+--------+-------| > | 4.856 | 0.048 | 5.52 | 88.5% | > | 13.748 | 0.160 | 15.04 | 92.4% | > | 15.004 | 0.036 | 16.06 | 93.5% | > | 8.464 | 0.068 | 10.37 | 82.1% | > | 8.420 | 0.088 | 13.29 | 63.9% | > | 5.568 | 0.052 | 8.03 | 69.8% | > | 7.648 | 0.064 | 9.26 | 83.1% | > | 12.020 | 0.056 | 14.16 | 85.2% | > | 7.796 | 0.044 | 11.00 | 71.1% | > | 27.352 | 0.068 | 33.71 | 81.3% | > | 6.564 | 0.044 | 7.00 | 94.2% | > | 17.124 | 0.108 | 19.17 | 89.8% | > | 6.124 | 0.068 | 6.79 | 91.0% | > | 10.632 | 0.068 | 11.73 | 91.1% | > | 15.932 | 0.052 | 17.33 | 92.2% | > | 6.836 | 0.080 | 7.61 | 90.8% | > | 3.964 | 0.040 | 4.54 | 88.1% | > | 5.076 | 0.160 | 6.01 | 87.0% | > | 3.488 | 0.060 | 4.06 | 87.1% | > | 3.532 | 0.056 | 4.14 | 86.4% | > | 3.516 | 0.044 | 4.20 | 84.5% | > | 3.576 | 0.064 | 4.17 | 87.0% | > | 3.552 | 0.064 | 4.12 | 87.6% | > | 6.528 | 0.176 | 10.73 | 62.3% | > |---------+-------+--------+-------| > | 207.320 | 1.768 | 248.04 | 84.3% | > | 386.384 | 0.392 | 415.94 | 92.9% | > > As you can see, the export gets slower (a lot) the larger the scope of > the export gets. I would hope that something can be done about it, I've > earlier tried to profile the export (posted over in the Orgmanual > thread), but I don't think the result was conclusive. > > So as an additional experiment, I just used the preamble and > Introduction of orgmanual.org and then doubled the copies of the > Introduction subtress with each iteration. I runtime was linear in > size, you'd expect to see the runtimes about double on each iteration, > too. > > | user | sys | wall | util | size | > |---------+-------+--------+-------+------| > | 2.500 | 0.064 | 3.14 | 81.5% | 18K | > | 3.740 | 0.056 | 4.37 | 86.7% | 33K | > | 6.224 | 0.112 | 6.98 | 90.6% | 63K | > | 11.524 | 0.060 | 12.53 | 92.4% | 122K | > | 22.860 | 0.084 | 24.35 | 94.2% | 241K | > | 48.760 | 0.100 | 51.87 | 94.1% | 479K | > | 110.804 | 0.124 | 120.64 | 91.9% | 955K | > | 280.084 | 0.360 | 304.48 | 92.1% | 1.9M | > | 868.712 | 0.768 | 930.24 | 93.4% | 3.8M | > > Octave thinks that y = 1.725 x^2 + 1.025 x + 0.009 is a good fit to that > data, so O(N^2) behaviour overall as suspected. > > > Regards, > Achim. > -- > +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ > > Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf rackAttack: > http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds > >
