According to Joe R. Jah: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Gilles Detillieux wrote: > > Please test this out and make sure it doesn't cause any problems, and > > that it helps! Apply using "patch -p0 << this-message-file". > > I backed out both slightly-better.0 and exclude_perform.0 and applied > exclude_perform.1, this patch. I ran htdig on the same site as before for > profile; htdig ran ~43% faster than the first time;) Here is the profile: > > ftp://ftp.ccsf.org/htdig-patches/3.2.0b5/htdig.gmon.exclude_perform.1.gz
Great, thanks! The numbers seem pretty close to those of exclude_perform.0. How about total run time numbers? I think you had said that exclude_perform.0 made it run ~40% faster. Since there's no conceivable reason for my patch to outperform Chris's, I'd write that off as statistically insignificant. Of course, run time numbers are usually only significant if you average many runs, unless they are obviously hugely different. Based on your feedback and Chris's, though, I'd say there's also no obvious performance penalty to my approach either, even though it re-fetches the exclude_urls and bad_querystr attributes for every link it parses. -- Gilles R. Detillieux E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Spinal Cord Research Centre WWW: http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/ Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB R3E 3J7 (Canada) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The Robotic Monkeys at ThinkGeek For a limited time only, get FREE Ground shipping on all orders of $35 or more. Hurry up and shop folks, this offer expires April 30th! http://www.thinkgeek.com/freeshipping/?cpg=12297 _______________________________________________ ht://Dig Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.) https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
