3 ms·

For the benchmarks did you clear the page cache inbetween runs? It’s crazy fast and seems a little suspect

• infogulch 9y ago
  The readme says the benchmarks are designed to run warm, so I would assume each was run once or twice beforehand.
• sharkdp 9y ago
  Thank you for the feedback! The benchmarks that are mentioned in the README are performed for a "warm cache", i.e. I'm running one of the tools first to fill the caches. Then, I'm performing multiple runs of each tool (using bench for some nice statistics) such that both tools profit from the warmed-up cache. I also perform other benchmarks where I clear the caches. In this case, 'fd' is usually even faster. The scripts for both warm and cold cache are here: https://gist.github.com/sharkdp/4bc3e5f5ea9df2f29c02ede50634b16a https://gist.github.com/sharkdp/4bc3e5f5ea9df2f29c02ede50634...
  • xfactor973 9y ago
    Awesome. Sorry I should’ve dug a little deeper before commenting. Nice job on the multithreading also!
  • dbdr 9y ago
    > using bench for some nice statistics 'bench' turns out to be this tool: https://github.com/Gabriel439/bench https://github.com/Gabriel439/bench It seems to be quite useful, and I was not aware of it, thanks! Would probably be nice to have it packaged in distributions...
• the8472 9y ago
  for a narrow set of usecases with cold page caches I have written ffcnt[0]. As the name says I mostly use it to count how many million files have accumulated over time in a large directory tree. It could be extended to do regex matching on filenames a la find though, I just never had the need for it. [0] https://github.com/the8472/ffcnt https://github.com/the8472/ffcnt