[sldev] 25% of processing time in particle operator= ???

[Erik Anderson]

Didn't someone say that this was a debug build that someone profiled?  In my
debug builds things take 2-3 times longer to happen because of all the
sanity checks that are made on the smallest of operations...

On 3/21/07, David Baker <david_baker at iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>  Hi all,
>
> Just looking back at the profiling output Laurent Laborde posted on 19
> March.  I know there are a lot of provisos on using profiling results re
> overheads of various sorts - however I noticed the following:
>
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | + 25.5%LLPointer<LLViewerPart>::operator=(LLPointer<LLViewerPart> const&) (Second
> Life)
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - 10.3% LLPointer<LLViewerPart>::unref()
> (Second Life)
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - 10.0% LLPointer<LLViewerPart>::ref()
> (Second Life)
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - 5.0% mcount (libSystem.B.dylib)
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0% LLRefCount::unref() (Second Life)
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 0.0% dyld_stub_mcount (Second Life)
> > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - 0.0% mcount (libSystem.B.dylib)
> Can someone who knows how these reports work better than me please confirm
> - does this indicate that the viewer was spending 25.5% of its processor
> time setting pointers to particles equal to each other?  That seems like it
> is a lot...  Anyone got any way of telling how often this function is being
> called?
>
> David
>
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070321/b06f45b5/attachment.htm