Done! https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/11888

Thanks for the suggestion.

Best,
Shing

 - Shing Lyu | Mozilla Taipei

2016-06-28 3:56 GMT+08:00 Jet Villegas <jville...@mozilla.com>:

> I see that Servo was replacing an iterating strcmp with hashing, so that
> explains the speed wins they're seeing. Maybe they should look into bsearch
> for the memory wins too, if speed is comparable.
>
> Shing Lyu: will you note that in the Servo github issue?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Jet
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Nathan Froyd <nfr...@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Jet Villegas <jville...@mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Shing Lyu from our Taipei Layout team reports a 25% page load
>> improvement
>> > in Servo from moving to a hashtable lookup from an iterator search of
>> the
>> > public suffix list ( https://publicsuffix.org/ )
>> >
>> > Should Gecko do the same thing and replace our binary search method?
>> >
>> https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/security/manager/ssl/nsSiteSecurityService.cpp#917
>>
>> Gecko's public suffix code lives over in netwerk/dns/:
>>
>>
>> https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/tip/netwerk/dns/nsEffectiveTLDService.cpp#l51
>>
>> Bug 1247835 [1] changed its hashtable usage to a binary search earlier
>> this year and we have not noticed any negative fallout.  Performance
>> measurements in the bug suggest the binary search might actually be
>> slightly faster, and the current structure enables us to easily share
>> the lookup structures between processes, as well as being smaller than
>> the previous hashtable scheme.  (If we switched to downloading public
>> suffix lists--bug 1083971 [2]--the sharing would presumably go away,
>> but we'd still get the size wins.)
>>
>> -Nathan
>>
>> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1247835
>> [2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1083971
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Reply via email to