Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A9A139BA4 for ; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:07:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 84265 invoked by uid 500); 29 Feb 2012 17:07:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 84227 invoked by uid 500); 29 Feb 2012 17:07:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 84218 invoked by uid 99); 29 Feb 2012 17:07:53 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:07:53 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bchesneau@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.52] (HELO mail-lpp01m010-f52.google.com) (209.85.215.52) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:07:46 +0000 Received: by lahi5 with SMTP id i5so3693631lah.11 for ; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:07:26 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of bchesneau@gmail.com designates 10.152.102.237 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.152.102.237; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of bchesneau@gmail.com designates 10.152.102.237 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=bchesneau@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=bchesneau@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.152.102.237]) by 10.152.102.237 with SMTP id fr13mr1126103lab.10.1330535246134 (num_hops = 1); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:07:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BXyuGsvQJ2Wb1q5O965fNP44FcQVl866np0wBehuv+Y=; b=RObYTnDeCU3jmNsr21o5Ca1n767pr5Py7CMYltoNcRWzmp5sgRNQHHPjBCueD2ahI0 UyWHKE1++vLOyOWlLhnmK+9u0/3Z4heNwpgKXPZgzHY7JjYN03yScCx9zf9Jt78wbp7G 0zBWbNwXgnrjxSSb0c6mWK2uMV+7FoEFVD7gM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.102.237 with SMTP id fr13mr922106lab.10.1330535246010; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:07:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.85.65 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:07:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4568D302-D9F2-49FE-9251-B280127F879D@apache.org> <9BB2567A-6723-43F6-AC17-15109C020EC0@apache.org> <8395A163-1E6C-470A-892D-844020D71F09@apache.org> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:07:25 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Please report your indexing speed From: Benoit Chesneau To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Benoit Chesneau wrot= e: > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Robert Newson wrote= : >> I've produced a new script that reproduces the view regression. I >> apologize in advance for exposing my awful Bash scripting abilities >> (also my inability to write "pure" shell. Your "Bashism" is my "it >> works"). >> >> I get 0m56.521s for 1.1.x and 1m17.108s for 1.2.x. That is, 1.1.x >> complete the same task in only 72% of the time that 1.2.x takes. >> >> http://friendpaste.com/UI1OcECLEzR6i4D75LqQy >> > > hrm with the same script: > > 1.2.0 : > real =A0 =A00m23.842s > user =A0 =A00m0.007s > sys =A0 =A0 0m0.004s > > 1.1.1: > real =A0 =A00m28.625s > user =A0 =A00m0.008s > sys =A0 =A0 0m0.005s > > hw specs : > $ uname -a > Darwin enki.local 11.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 11.3.0: Thu Jan 12 > 18:47:41 PST 2012; root:xnu-1699.24.23~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64 > mba 2011: =A0i7 =A04 GB SSD 256 GB > > > - beno=EEt Just for my curiosity I tested it in the couchdb based distribution I maintain (head, last mochiweb + jiffy) : real 0m19.539s user 0m0.007s sys 0m0.005s done