Re: Rewrite Mutable_properties based on vector<SCM> (issue 575990043 by address@hidden)

[hanwenn]

On 2020/04/13 16:58:41, hanwenn wrote:
> On 2020/04/13 16:40:34, hahnjo wrote:
> > I gave this patch a try on my system, time lilypond MSDM.ly, 'real'
time, 3
> > repetitions
> > 
> > baseline (master, 0e7c26d40f):
> > 0m42,533s; 0m42,547s; 0m42,430s
> > 
> > Abstract Grob property storage into Mutable_properties.
> > (https://codereview.appspot.com/561640043)
> > 0m41,102s; 0m41,036s; 0m40,861s
> > 
> > Rewrite Mutable_properties based on vector<SCM>
> > (https://codereview.appspot.com/575990043/)
> > 0m42,461s; 0m42,632s; 0m42,212s
> > 
> > (I did not apply any of the other optimization patches posted in the
last
> days.)
> > If at all, Issue 561640043 seems to show some benefit. This _could_
be because
> > Grob::Grob (Grob const &s) doesn't call ly_deep_copy anymore, but
I've only
> > looked into this very briefly because I think the introduction of
> > Mutable_properties makes sense in any case. However I clearly don't
see 7%
> > improvement for this patch. Is there anything I missed?
> 
> No, I'll have a look at some other systems. You're right about the
deep copy,
> and it's an explanation.
> 
> What machine are you trying this with? For the record, I see the
difference with
> GUILE 1.8 on Fedora 31 on a T460p (i5 6440HQ 2.6Ghz). I'll try with
the other
> machines that I have for comparison.

Grumbl.  I think some of the timings must have used the -pg flag I used
to gather profiling data :-(

https://codereview.appspot.com/575990043/