On 10/22/2009 01:09 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
p.s. I'll look at bypassing stdio on input to see
if I can get at least the 2% back
IMHO, even if it did, it would not be worth it.
Right, a quick test here shows only a 0.8% gain from
bypassing stdio. Ho
Kamil Dudka wrote:
...
>> > Any idea how to solve the problem? Thanks in advance!
>>
>> I don't see how we can justify any such change.
>> Being able to detect whether the traversal returns to a previously
>> visited directory is required for security and reliability. Weakening
>> that device/inod
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>
>>> p.s. I'll look at bypassing stdio on input to see
>>> if I can get at least the 2% back
>>
>> IMHO, even if it did, it would not be worth it.
>
> Right, a quick test here shows only a 0.8% gain from
> bypassing stdio. However
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Pádraig Brady on 10/22/2009 5:09 AM:
> digest routines in gnulib do fread(4096).
> Bumping that up to 32KiB gives a 3% boost.
Well spotted.
> Does anyone have any objections to increasing
> the stack requirement by 28672 bytes?
None her
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
>> p.s. I'll look at bypassing stdio on input to see
>> if I can get at least the 2% back
>
> IMHO, even if it did, it would not be worth it.
Right, a quick test here shows only a 0.8% gain from
bypassing stdio. However I also noticed that the
digest
