Hans Hagen wrote: > Santy, Michael wrote: >> Its entirely possible that I'm missing something, but I was merely >> inquiring about running the same timing tests that you did with >> mplib, but instead using the existing MKII and MKIV image inclusion >> code. How much of a speedup over the existing code does the mplib >> integration buy us for this benchmark? > > well, processing 15K mp graphics either runtime or delayed would take > way much time (no fun timing)
IIRC, beginning of the week we had a speedup of 50% against oldfashioned mkiv (mptopdf-in-lua) with a batched Metapost run, which is alread some 25% faster than batched Metapost in mkii mode (mptopdf-in-tex). And that was before we started optimizing, we are at least twice as fast now as we were then. And in the old system, batched metapost was a whole lot faster than runtime Metapost. Take a look at it this way: if you have a document stuffed full of backgrounds and borders and decorations, you may have a dozen unique decorations per page. On a 200-page book, the total runtime used by the new MPlib-based graphics system is then still less than a second (well, if you were using Hans' machine). Best wishes, Taco ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : [email protected] / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
