On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 3.0 MiB + 277.5 KiB = 3.3 > MiB /usr/bin/python2.5/usr/sbin/olpc-update-query--auto-s10 > Normal build: > > ... > 3.3 MiB + 333.0 KiB = 3.6 MiB python/usr/bin/sugar-shell-service > --------------------------------- > 103.9 MiB
You added an olpc-update-query in your first set of numbers (-OO), but there wasn't one running in your 'normal' run. Also, your addition seems to be off, probably because you are eliding other rows which aren't actually matching up between runs. When I add the matching columns that you included, I get 73.7M for -OO and 79.7M for 'normal', for a 6M (~8%) savings. > Had to backport two patches for -OO to work: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460334 See also http://scipy.org/scipy/numpy/ticket/893, which contains a patch we'd need to apply to numpy if we were to actually use -OO. > As Scott wrote initially, we still need to dig a bit more in order to > see all the tradeoffs in play here. So far it seems we have "modest" memory savings (perhaps more as we write more documentation!) -- I'd like to see numbers quantifying any speed improvement (if any) which -OO provides, as well as the NAND cost: how big are all those .pyo files? Do folks think it's worth trying out -OO in joyride? --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
