This is the mail archive of the archer@sourceware.org mailing list for the Archer project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: gdb index performance

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
Cc: Project Archer <archer at sourceware dot org>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 15:24:27 -0600
Subject: Re: gdb index performance
References: <m3aaqlbkmx.fsf@fleche.redhat.com><20100623210802.GA17835@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
Reply-to: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>

Jan> Wasn't there a problem with incomplete backtraces (due to prelink) such as
Jan> shown at the top of:
Jan> 	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-06/msg00515.html
	
For the abiword (PPC) case I manually checked the backtraces and it all
seemed reasonable enough.

Ugh, I looked at the x86 case and it turns out I need a merge from
master to pick up some unhandled DWARF operators.  Sorry about that.

>> The warm cache "bt" results are particularly good (actually I thought
>> something went wrong so I did this again by hand -- it really is that
>> fast)

Jan> Just to be sure - assuming the machine had enough RAM.  # of CPUs?

The PPC box has 2 CPUs.  It seems to have a lot of memory (3G).

The x86 box is my laptop, 1 CPU.  It has 1G of RAM.

Tom

Follow-Ups:
- Re: gdb index performance
  - From: Tom Tromey

References:
- gdb index performance
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: gdb index performance
  - From: Jan Kratochvil

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]