Paul Lesniewski wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:51 AM, C. Bensend <benny@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> 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. >> >> I've applied this patch, and it seems a little faster... Maybe a >> 10 to 20% improvement? I'll keep it in place and see how it >> performs. > > How did you quantify that? Or is it just a random guess based on how > responsive the interface *seems* to you? > He might have some CPU load monitor/stats on his production machine. First test 1.4.19 vs 1.4.20 - http://yfrog.com/j9nuotraukacutp Second test 1.4.20 before patch - http://yfrog.com/eubeforepatchp Second test 1.4.20 after patch - http://yfrog.com/euafterpatchp -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Performance-issues-with-1.4.20--tp27986928p28010567.html Sent from the squirrelmail-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
