On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 09:36:11PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 07:33:29PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > > When adding element(s) to a non-empty set, code merged the two lists and > > sorted the result. With many individual 'add element' commands this > > causes substantial overhead. Make use of the fact that > > existing_set->init is sorted already, sort only the list of new elements > > and use list_splice_sorted() to merge the two sorted lists. > > > > A test case adding ~25k elements in individual commands completes in > > about 1/4th of the time with this patch applied. > > Good. > > Do you still like the idea of coalescing set element commands whenever > possible? Does it mess with error reporting? If not, I don't see a downside of doing it. With regards to the problem at hand, it seems like a feature to escape the actual problem. Please keep in mind that my patch's improvement from ~4min down to ~1min is pretty lousy given that v1.0.1 completed the same task in 0.3s. IMHO the whole overlap detection/auto merging should happen as commit preparation and not per command. Cheers, Phil
