Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-04-11 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> /home/hanwen/lilypond/usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.22(FT_Stream_Open+0x10d) This is interesting. If the normal libtool versioning system is used, `6.3.22' corresponds to FreeType version 2.3.11, released in 2009! The current FreeType release is 2.7.1, corresponding to 6.13.0. Please check that!

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-04-11 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
After a intricate upgrade of laptop, I now have some stacktraces. They don't tell me much, read(16, "OTTO\0\r\0\200\0\3\0PCFF \26g\353\377\0\0\r\30\0\0\366\253FFTM"..., 4096) = 4096 > /usr/lib64/libc-2.24.so(__read_nocancel+0x7) [0xf7bd0] > /usr/lib64/libc-2.24.so(_IO_file_seekoff+0x34b) [0x7a4

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-23 Thread Trevor
Downloaded binary. On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:38 PM Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > Trevor, did you compile it from scratch or are you using the packaged > binary? > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Trevor wrote: > > I don't know enough to be very helpful, but I can report that on Ubuntu, > I > >

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-23 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Trevor, did you compile it from scratch or are you using the packaged binary? On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Trevor wrote: > I don't know enough to be very helpful, but I can report that on Ubuntu, I > also see "9925953 90234" from strace. > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:33 AM Han-Wen N

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-23 Thread Trevor
I don't know enough to be very helpful, but I can report that on Ubuntu, I also see "9925953 90234" from strace. On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:33 AM Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > the repeating syscall is the read, on the same file descriptor. If > fontconfig failed a cache, you'd more likely see

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-21 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
the repeating syscall is the read, on the same file descriptor. If fontconfig failed a cache, you'd more likely see open() = 6 read(6, .. ) close(6) open() = 6 read(6, .. ) close(6) I think. I'll have a look again tonight. Maybe I can attach a debugger (my machine has long lost the ability

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-20 Thread Werner LEMBERG
>> "The culprit is that the lilypond binary has a bit sub-optimal file >> access pattern (opening the same file thousands of times and >> reading it byte by byte, causing a syscall flood - nearly 500K >> lseek and read operations). On a local machine, because of this >> issue, it will spend about

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-20 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Trevor wrote: > I'm trying to run LilyPond in Google Cloud Functions > , and execution is ridiculously slow > (like 40 seconds compilation vs. 2 seconds on my laptop). A Google Cloud > engineer tested it and reported the followi

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-16 Thread David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes: > Trevor writes: > >> I'm trying to run LilyPond in Google Cloud Functions >> , and execution is ridiculously slow >> (like 40 seconds compilation vs. 2 seconds on my laptop). A Google Cloud >> engineer tested it and reported the followi

Re: Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-16 Thread David Kastrup
Trevor writes: > I'm trying to run LilyPond in Google Cloud Functions > , and execution is ridiculously slow > (like 40 seconds compilation vs. 2 seconds on my laptop). A Google Cloud > engineer tested it and reported the following: > > "The culprit is that th

Degenerate file access patterns

2017-03-16 Thread Trevor
I'm trying to run LilyPond in Google Cloud Functions , and execution is ridiculously slow (like 40 seconds compilation vs. 2 seconds on my laptop). A Google Cloud engineer tested it and reported the following: "The culprit is that the lilypond binary has a bit