21–30 of 375 posts
Could you release a fork of jq whose make does all this fanciness? I use jq A LOT so would love a turnkey solution to make it faster.
https://github.com/01mf02/jaq?tab=readme-ov-file#performance jaq runs 5x faster on my machine in some cases
O3 is a bad idea if the package is important. While that’s a dated opinion based on older experiences (Gentoo, various server software, etc), I suspect it’s still the easiest way to get exposed to compiler bugs.
> What happens if you grab the jq source code from Launchpad, then configure and rebuild it with no flags at all? Even that is about 2-4% faster than the Ubuntu binary package. Why wouldn't that be identical?
Could be measurement noise..
O3 is a bad idea if the package is important. While that’s a dated opinion based on older experiences (Gentoo, various server software, etc), I suspect it’s still the easiest way to get exposed to compiler bugs.
In all seriousness though, are you sure some of this isn’t those blocks being loaded into some kind of file system cache the second and third times?
How about if you rebooted and then ran the mimalloc version?
It's actually a little bit interesting, if you are interested in how we use language. You could argue that now you now get 90% more work done in the same amount of time, and that would align with other 'speed' units that we commonly use (miles per hour, words per minute, bits per second). However, the convention in computer performance is to measure time for a fixed amount of work. I would guess that this is because generally we have a fixed amount of work and what might vary is how long we wait for it (and that is absolutely true in the case of this blog post) so we put time in the numerator.
It's a very interesting post and very well done, but it's not 90% faster.
I’m almost more amazed that someone figured out jq’s syntax and got some use out of it. In all seriousness though, are you sure some of this isn’t those blocks being loaded into some kind of file system cache the second and third times? How about if you rebooted and then ran the mimalloc version?
O3 is a bad idea if the package is important. While that’s a dated opinion based on older experiences (Gentoo, various server software, etc), I suspect it’s still the easiest way to get exposed to compiler bugs.
If you're going to offer unsupported FUD, I would prefer you direct the FUD at NDEBUG and the fear that it could have disabled a load-bearing assertion.
Even Design by Contract in Eiffel turns off assertions in production.