On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Tomas Kuliavas <tokul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > C. Bensend wrote: >> >> >> Hey folks, >> >> After vetting 1.4.20 on a development server, I rolled it out to >> my colocated server successfully. >> >> Since then, the performance in the web interface has taken a >> pretty bad hit. With 1.4.19, bringing up each email was almost >> instantaneous, now there is a several second lag between each one >> .... >> I'm not complaining, the performance is still acceptable, it's >> just a mild annoyance. Has anyone else seen any performance hits >> with 1.4.20? >> > > Mailbox listing in 145 ms on 1.4.19 vs 403 ms on 1.4.20. > sm_truncate_string() has performance issues. The issue is the array_walk() in sq_mb_list_encodings(), which does not cache its results. The attached patch is still slower than the pre-1.4.20 code, but it's much closer. Testing and feedback is appreciated. - Paul -- Paul Lesniewski SquirrelMail Team Please support Open Source Software by donating to SquirrelMail! http://squirrelmail.org/donate_paul_lesniewski.php
Attachment:
squirrelmail-list_encodings-performance-fix.diff
Description: Binary data
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
----- squirrelmail-users mailing list Posting guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/postingguidelines List address: squirrelmail-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx List archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.squirrelmail.user List info (subscribe/unsubscribe/change options): https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
