On 03.03.2018 17:44, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 04:32:35PM +0000, Philip Martin wrote: >> Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> writes: >> >>> Which leads me to believe that r1778923 may have been based on wrong >>> assumptions about performance. The new authz is not fast enough to >>> significantly reduce per-request overhead. >> My testing so far was with a very small authz file -- only a handful of >> rules and aliases. If I add a few hundred trival rules to the file then >> 1.11 becomes signifcantly slower than 1.9 while reverting is still much >> faster: >> >> 1.9: 4.3s >> trunk 1.11: 14.6s >> reverted 1.11: 1.9s > Thanks for testing and confirming this. > > I think our best course of action is to revert the change on trunk > and in 1.10.x. Could you do that? (I could do it, too. I'm just asking > you since you've probably already prepared it in a local copy.)
So if I understand this debate correctly: The authz code is so much faster now that parsing the authz file and performing the authz lookups beats calculating its MD5 checksum? -- Brane
