On 26.09.2013 02:08, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:



[...]

I think this is excellent work! Solid analysis. I know there's been some thought given to caching subst() before; it's trickier than one might think but in many cases it should work, and it definitely speeds things up. I'm also impressed by a 30% memory reduction -- interested to hear how that comes out.


I continued my work on reducing the overall memory consumption in SCons. By combining my old branch (where I switched the core to using slots) with some additional patches, I am now able to save up to 50% memory...depending on the project. Please find some results attached (a comparison between the current default "tip" and my experimental branch), the code can be cloned from:

hg clone http://bitbucket.org/dirkbaechle/scons_experimental -r reduced_memory_updated

I also achieved up to 20% speed improvements on updates, by a first version of a caching for the env.subst() method.

Best regards,

Dirk


Title: Comparing default to lowmem

wonderbuild

Times

Runrun [s]update [s]update_implicit [s]
Previous1172.325.619.4
Current1131.622.015.5
Factor0.970.860.80

Memory

Runrun [MByte]update [MByte]
Previous451.4424.2
Current251.5197.8
Factor0.560.47

sconsbld

Times

Runrun [s]update [s]update_implicit [s]
Previous440.335.026.1
Current343.828.719.8
Factor0.780.820.76

Memory

Runrun [MByte]update [MByte]
Previous538.6554.4
Current231.6238.7
Factor0.430.43

questfperf

Times

Runrun [s]update [s]update_implicit [s]
Previous1022.424.216.9
Current984.820.412.9
Factor0.960.840.77

Memory

Runrun [MByte]update [MByte]
Previous378.9391.1
Current210.9196.3
Factor0.560.50

mapnik

Times

Runrun [s]update [s]update_implicit [s]
Previous867.212.54.7
Current867.59.44.1
Factor1.000.750.87

Memory

Runrun [MByte]update [MByte]
Previous151.5144.1
Current110.9110.7
Factor0.730.77
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

Reply via email to