[Scons-dev] SCons speedup and profiling results...

[Johan Holmberg]

On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:


> On 26.09.2013 02:08, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:

>

>>

>>

>>

>> [...]

>>

>> I think this is excellent work!  Solid analysis.  I know there's been

>> some thought given to caching subst() before; it's trickier than one might

>> think but in many cases it should work, and it definitely speeds things up.

>>  I'm also impressed by a 30% memory reduction -- interested to hear how

>> that comes out.

>>

>>

> I continued my work on reducing the overall memory consumption in SCons.

> By combining my old branch (where I switched the core to using slots) with

> some additional patches, I am now able to save up to 50% memory...depending

> on the project.

> Please find some results attached (a comparison between the current

> default "tip" and my experimental branch), the code can be cloned from:

>

>     hg clone http://bitbucket.org/**dirkbaechle/scons_experimental<http://bitbucket.org/dirkbaechle/scons_experimental>-r reduced_memory_updated

>

> I also achieved up to 20% speed improvements on updates, by a first

> version of a caching for the env.subst() method.

>

> Best regards,

> Dirk

>

>

Hi!

I tried your branch "reduced_memory_updated" and noticed that when I
alternate between using that branch and the "default" branch from the main
SCons repository, some files in my project are rebuilt. Has the signature
calculation in your branch been changed so I should expect this to happen?

I use:

- f4f09fbddf29 from "default" branch in main SCons repo
- 3b330d4bc8dc from "reduced_memory_updated" in your "scons_experimental"
repo

Apart from this I see the memory consumption decrease from 720MB --> 450MB,
and the up-to-date check time drop from 2m20s --> 1m57s.

/Johan Holmberg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20131001/56a1f0c0/attachment.html>