Adam Lock wrote:
>
> John Bandhauer wrote:
>
> > The persistent format of the type info is the .xpt files. xpti
> > also supports .xpt files that are inside .zip and .jar file
> > (though we currently don't use that feature).
>
> Are there plans to make use of jar files or concatenate the xpt files into a big one?
> The xpt files only total to 100k or so of data but with 60+ files they are very space
> wasteful, especially on large FAT partitions. Performance may also benefit marginally
> from less file opens/closes.
What product are you talking about? For installer builds that go
to end users we (last I checked) use xpt_link at packaging time
to combine the .xpt files of the various "modules": core,
browser, mailnews. This change was made to improve loading time
for PR2(?). But this causes us to read in a lot of information
that we never use, but which wastes memory anyway.
There is some discussion in
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46707
It looks like the best compromise is to build a zip of the .xpt
files for each of these "modules" rather than a linked bigger
.xpt file. This is purely a packaging issue. The xpti runtime
code is ready to deal with either case without changes.
I did some work on the packaging changes for the browser. But did
not finish it. It still is likely to be about a 250k win for the
suite. I'd certainly urge anyone packaging for embedding or
whatever to look at zipping the xpt files.
John.
