From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22629 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2003 18:44:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22622 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2003 18:44:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2003 18:44:10 -0000 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0MIi2308039; Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:44:02 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: "Martin M. Hunt" Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, Elena Zannoni Subject: Re: very very slow symbol searches References: <1043236817.32119.7.camel@Dragon> From: David Carlton Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:44:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00379.txt.bz2 On 22 Jan 2003 10:26:08 -0800, David Carlton said: > On 22 Jan 2003 04:00:16 -0800, "Martin M. Hunt" said: >> Insight calls search_symbols twice on startup. Sometime 2-4 weeks >> ago, (builds from CVS on sources) Insight started taking a minute >> or two to load when debugging itself. It is very fast when >> debugging small programs, but large things like insight or gdb take >> forever. At first glance the problem is that search_symbols() is >> taking 20-30 seconds to return. > Could you give some commands to reproduce this problem? (Preferably > using GDB to debug itself.) I tried running GDB on itself and then > typing 'info functions', and I don't see any significant time > difference on current mainline GDB versus GDB 5.2 or 5.3. (In both > cases, the version of GDB being debugged current mainline GDB.) I > also tried running to main first, to pull in dynamic libraries > (which shouldn't have debug info on my system, I think). Without > running to main, mainline GDB was actually the fastest, albeit only > slightly so; with running to main, mainline GDB was slightly slower > than 5.3 but dramatically faster than 5.2. Of course, my patch would have affected 'info variables' more than 'info functions'. So I did the same tests with 'info variables'; here, 5.2 is really slow, 5.3 and mainline are better, and actually mainline is faster than 5.3 on the version where I run to main first. At any rate, obviously I'm not managing to tickle this bug correctly. It is nice to see the speedup since 5.2: somebody obviously did something good there. (Is it an effect of hashing symtabs, maybe, or did 5.2 already do that?) David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu