On Sun, Nov 09, 2003, Oleg Kobets wrote about "Re: Redhat 9 slowness - continued":
> Oh, well.
> But the question remains, why is it slower ?

Continuing the Redhat 9 saga:

I previously thought that the slowdown had something to do with the dynamic
linking slowdown. I no longer think so - I think the /lib/tls/* libraries
are slower in doing some operation than /lib/i686/* libraries are.

I now ran hspell on a very big corpus of about 3 million Hebrew words,
on my Pentium 1500 running Redhat 9. With the default /lib/tls libraries,
hspell took 8 CPU seconds (user time). With LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/lib/i686,
the time is down to 4.5 seconds!!

The 3.5 second difference of course cannot be attributed to slow dynamic
linking - it's the /lib/tls that suck. My guess is that some common C
function that hspell uses, perhaps even the stdio, strlen(), or who knows
what, is much slower in the tls version.
 I wonder what is that slow-poke function that I should avoid... I can't
even profile this problem, because there is only one variant of the
profiling libraries (glibc-profile doesn't appear to contain "tls" and
"i686" variants).

Another possibility is that the tls version wasn't optimized for 686 while
the i686 libraries were - though I doubt this can explain the almost half-
speed performance I'm seeing.

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |      Sunday, Nov 9 2003, 15 Heshvan 5764
[EMAIL PROTECTED]             |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-790466, ICQ 13349191 |From the Linux getopt(3) manpage: "BUGS:
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |This manpage is confusing."

=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to