On Samstag, 4. April 2009, Marius Storm-Olsen wrote: > Pat Thoyts said the following on 03.04.2009 23:12: > > The difference on Windows Vista is that the low fragmentation heap > > is the default memory allocator. On Windows XP you need to enable > > it specifically for an application. So a possible alternative to > > this is just to enable the low fragmentation heap. (done via > > GetProcessHeaps and HeapSetInformation Win32 API calls). > > I know about the low-fragmentation heap, but given that it was only > supported on XP and up (and given that I also had MacOSX in mind when > considering a custom allocator; see MacOSX got 12% itself ;-), I > didn't even consider it. > Thanks for clearing up the differences on the Vista and XP benchmarks > though! Makes sense. Wouldn't a GetProcessHeaps/HeapSetInformation solution add much less code, even with a runtime check whether the feature is supported? The improvement that you observed is in a rather special area (repack). How is the improvment in day-to-day tools: - procelains used on command line: git-status, git-add, git-commit, git-diff, git-log, perhaps even local git-fetch. - plumbing used by guis: git-diff-files, git-diff-tree, git-log, git-rev-parse - I'm not even mentioning git-am, git-rebase, because here the time sink is the fork emulation. I doubt that the improvement is equally great, and it will perhaps vanish in the noise. 7000+ LOC is a bit much in this case, don't you think so? BTW, I assume that the Boost license is compatible with GPL. But did you check that? -- Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
