GNU bug report logs - #66288
29.1; Performance regression using pipe for subprocess

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Chris Hanson <cph <at> chris-hanson.org>

Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2023 00:59:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 29.1

Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #14 received at 66288 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Chris Hanson <cph <at> chris-hanson.org>
Cc: 66288 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#66288: 29.1; Performance regression using pipe for subprocess
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2023 08:02:14 +0300
> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2023 14:02:26 -0400
> Cc: 66288 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Chris Hanson <cph <at> chris-hanson.org>
> 
> > Please post the comparison as you see it on your system, preferably in
> > quantitative terms (e.g., time it takes to read and process some chunk
> > of text in both versions), and using the same version of MIT/GNU
> > Scheme.
> > 
> > FWIW, I see no changes in xscheme.el between v28.1 and v29.1, except
> > some minor aesthetic changes and renames of functions.  So I wonder
> > how come you see a significant slowdown.
> 
> Attached find two screen grabs showing 28.2 and 29.1; you'll see the 
> difference is dramatic.  In both cases the same MIT/GNU Scheme version 
> was used.  (FYI: I'm the MIT/GNU Scheme maintainer, as well as the 
> original author of "xscheme.el".)

Thanks, but I cannot view these files here.  And viewing them might
change the timing anyway, which is why I prefer that you time this on
your system and provide the numbers with explanations how each number
was measured and what did Emacs do during that time.

> I saw that there were no relevant differences in "xscheme.el" but I 
> never thought that was relevant.
> 
> I believe this has something to do with how piped subprocesses are being 
> managed.  I've not looked deeply into the C code for this, but I could 
> find no mention of anything to do with pipes in NEWS.

Because AFAIK we didn't change anything in that department.

Showing a profile ("M-x profiler-start RET RET", run the slow recipe,
then "M-x profiler-report RET", then post the fully-expanded profile)
could also provide some useful ideas about the source of the issue.

Thanks.




This bug report was last modified 1 year and 229 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.