Re: [PATCH] Fix severe performance regression with gettext 0.20+ on Windows
| От | Nazir Bilal Yavuz |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Fix severe performance regression with gettext 0.20+ on Windows |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAN55FZ1A2Cw85dP2py11F4Rb1XpJke8jHXDb_R-f23_uvDfVCQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Fix severe performance regression with gettext 0.20+ on Windows (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 at 22:26, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote: > > On 12.12.25 10:18, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote: > >>>> FWIW, Bilal and I had, IIRC, explicitly not enabled on windows CI because it > >>>> made the build process even slower. But perhaps we should re-measure the > >>>> difference and re-consider? > >>>> > >>>> Greetings, > >>>> > >>>> Andres Freund > >>> As long as you use Windows locale names once this patch is in place. > >>> Posix locale names will still incur the performance hit until the next > >>> gettext release. Once using the next gettext release there will not be a > >>> performance penalty for using an invalid locale on Windows. > >> > >> What I was referring to was that *building* with NLS support is slower than > >> building without, which is the reason why CI currently isn't testing NLS in > >> the "Windows - Server 2022, MinGW64 - Meson" task. Even with ccache, the CI > >> builds with mingw are pretty darn slow, adding the overhead of creating a good > >> number of additional files is (or was, haven't retested this recently) making > >> it even slower. > > > > I tested this and the timings (minute:seconds) of running tests: > > > > MinGW + NLS [1]: 16:01 > > MinGW + Patch + NLS [2]: 13:57 > > > > I ran the CI again to make sure and the speed up was similar. > > Andres was asking about the build time with and without NLS. You are right. I run CI again and compared build times now: MinGW - NLS [1]: 05:59 MinGW + NLS [2]: 05:55 MinGW + Patch - NLS [3]: 06:42 MinGW + Patch + NLS [4]: 06:04 > I have been testing this a bit. Locally, using MinGW, I was not able to > detect any significant difference. I did not detect any on the CI MinGW task either. > On CI runs, the numbers were to > erratic to get any consistent sense. Yes, I realized that. If you have not cleared the task cache, clearing it helps to some degree. [1] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6337023629328384 [2] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4929648745775104 [3] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5570413708705792 [4] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5409537722679296 -- Regards, Nazir Bilal Yavuz Microsoft
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: