David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > >> Bah. Got only 50% off, and a third of the rest is system time. At >> least an artificial test case went from 40 seconds to 2, but that is >> only a 95% reduction, so still a far cry from what I fantasized. >> >> And the wortliste still takes more than 6 minutes on my computer: >> >> dak@lola:/usr/local/tmp/wortliste$ time ../git/git blame wortliste >/dev/null >> >> real 6m18.501s >> user 3m58.104s >> sys 2m17.880s > > Which is not even a factor of 3 as compared to previously: > > dak@lola:/usr/local/tmp/wortliste$ time git blame wortliste >/dev/null > > real 18m28.269s > user 15m54.080s > sys 2m27.760s
Found another worthwhile optimization making a difference (basically, not discarding and regenerating a blob that is going to get analyzed next anyway). In your use case where almost all changes happen in the same large file, this does make a bit of a difference, in particular regarding the system time (probably mostly expended on file reads). dak@lola:/usr/local/tmp/wortliste$ time ../git/git blame wortliste >/dev/null real 4m18.314s user 2m59.460s sys 1m16.784s -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
