From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23885 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2015 13:08:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23876 invoked by uid 89); 2 Jun 2015 13:08:49 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pa0-f43.google.com Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com (HELO mail-pa0-f43.google.com) (209.85.220.43) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:08:47 +0000 Received: by padjw17 with SMTP id jw17so60808946pad.2 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 06:08:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.70.44.199 with SMTP id g7mr49759418pdm.27.1433250526140; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 06:08:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (gcc1-power7.osuosl.org. [140.211.15.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s1sm7600095pda.54.2015.06.02.06.08.44 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Jun 2015 06:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <556DAAD6.7030008@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:08:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make file-based lookup more interruptable References: <089e0160b1be9352da05162640cb@google.com> <86382ssrx7.fsf@gmail.com> <556D6267.5080408@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2 On 02/06/15 13:34, Doug Evans wrote: > An improvement of 10min -> 10s (or greater, I have made several) > would be "good news to users", no? They are good news to users, of course. However, whether letting users know them is another thing we need to decide. > >> >However, this change isn't performance improvement, because it doesn't >> >shorten the time of operation like "b 'foo.c':bar". > Oh? > "b 'foo.c':bar" + ^c changes from 10min to 10sec (or some such). > How is this any different? > Operation "b 'foo.c':bar" becomes more interruptable rather than more efficient. -- Yao (齐尧)