Re: Idea for faster dissection on second pas

[Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>]

On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Anders Broman <a.broman () bredband net> wrote:
> > Just looking at performance in general as I got reports that top of trunk
> > was slower than 1.8.
> > Thinking about it fast filtering is more attractive as long as loading isn't
> > to slow I suppose.
> > It's quite annoying to wait 2 minutes for a file to load and >=2 minutes on
> > every filter operation.
>
> Ya. It was quite surprising to me to find out how much data we're
> generating and throwing away on each dissection pass. Now I'm
> wondering how much of this could be alleviated somehow by a more
> efficient tree representation...

The answer is apparently lots :)

I tweaked some things in r52568, r52569 and r52573 that had a fairly
substantial improvement when dissecting with a tree. "tshark -V" is as
much as 18% faster in my tests, and filtering should improve a little
as well, though that is much harder to measure.

This may or may not fix the complaints you've been getting, but it's a
good improvement to have regardless.

Cheers,
Evan
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe