4 ms·
I was going to say that it was "instant", because that's how it feels when using it, but got 200ms from running "time" on grepping it to include a number in the
by jefftk 3y ago
I was going to say that it was "instant", because that's how it feels when using it, but got 200ms from running "time" on grepping it to include a number in the post.
- doodlesdev 3y agoHave you tried out using ripgrep [0] or fzf [1]? 200ms is quite a lot for history search, I'd expect search to be 20ms or less. In fact, it should be instantaneous as it should all fit in memory really. I've been using fzf and the searches are all faster than my monitor can display frames (so less than 16ms), although I only have 10k entries on my history as I clear it up once in a while. [0]: https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep https://github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep [1]: https://github.com/junegunn/fzf https://github.com/junegunn/fzf
- jefftk 3y agoTrying now, "cat > /dev/null" takes ~150ms, so I suspect it's related to keeping my history in Google Drive (with local mirroring). If it gets annoyingly slows I'll stop doing that and use a different syncing system.
- jefftk 3y agoActually, I was an idiot and misreading these numbers. It's 0.020s and 0.015s, which are 20ms and 15ms, not 200ms and 150ms.