[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Locking Table Member Additions
- From: Paige DePol <lual@...>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:00:43 -0500
On Jun 18, 2014, at 11:06 AM, Sean Conner <sean@conman.org> wrote:
> It was thus said that the Great Paige DePol once stated:
>> On Jun 18, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@tecgraf.puc-rio.br> wrote:
>>
>>> Here is another example. It's a graphics metafile for drawing the official
>>> map of NYC subway converted from PDF. It has 165000 lines and lots of
>>> different numbers. Here are the sizes in bytes:
>>>
>>> source 6858481
>>> binary 12115217 (1.77 of source)
>>> stripped 6633947 (0.97 of source)
>>
>> Well, given that example I think I am justified in saying that having a
>> stripped binary be larger than the original source is probably a rare
>> occurrence! :)
>
> Not all that rare. From my previous example, I did stripped versions, and
> on a 32-bit system:
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5972 Jun 18 11:28 IS41.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 7009 Jun 18 11:28 IS41.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5567 Jun 18 11:50 IS41s.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1687 Jun 18 11:28 enum.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 2310 Jun 18 11:29 enum.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1729 Jun 18 11:50 enums.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1250 Jun 18 11:28 person.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1932 Jun 18 11:29 person.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1181 Jun 18 11:50 persons.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5709 Jun 18 11:28 phone.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5450 Jun 18 11:29 phone.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 2755 Jun 18 11:50 phones.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 21440 Jun 18 11:28 picture.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 8526 Jun 18 11:29 picture.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 6867 Jun 18 11:50 pictures.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 3296 Jun 18 11:28 testbed.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 4789 Jun 18 11:29 testbed.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 3228 Jun 18 11:50 testbeds.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 986 Jun 18 11:28 util.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1709 Jun 18 11:29 util.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 932 Jun 18 11:50 utils.o
>
> The compiled-stripped version of enum.lua (enums.o) is larger than the
> original source, but for the rest, they're marginally smaller. Now, on to
> the 64-bit versions:
>
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5972 2014-06-18 11:34 IS41.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 7721 2014-06-18 11:34 IS41.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 6279 2014-06-18 11:56 IS41s.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1687 2014-06-18 11:34 enum.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 2550 2014-06-18 11:34 enum.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1925 2014-06-18 11:56 enums.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1250 2014-06-18 11:34 person.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 2176 2014-06-18 11:34 person.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1373 2014-06-18 11:56 persons.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5709 2014-06-18 11:34 phone.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 6058 2014-06-18 11:34 phone.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 3039 2014-06-18 11:57 phones.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 21440 2014-06-18 11:34 picture.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 8914 2014-06-18 11:34 picture.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 7107 2014-06-18 11:57 pictures.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 3296 2014-06-18 11:34 testbed.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 5425 2014-06-18 11:34 testbed.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 3728 2014-06-18 11:57 testbeds.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 986 2014-06-18 11:34 util.lua
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1933 2014-06-18 11:35 util.o
> -rw-r--r-- 1 spc spc 1072 2014-06-18 11:57 utils.o
>
> There, both compiler versions are larger, athough the stripped versions
> are only a bit larger.
>
> -spc (So, again, it comes down to measuring ... )
Thank you for posting those comparisons, it was very enlightening!
I guess it likely comes down to the number of unique constants being used, also I suspect that larger source files have more chance to become smaller than files that are only a few kilobytes in size... also the whole 32/64-bit thing obviously make a difference as well.
That said, I can still see the utility of pre-compiling scripts and removing the parser from the Lua core on restricted hardware! :)
~pmd
- References:
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Tom N Harris
- RE: Locking Table Member Additions, Leinen, Rick
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Sean Conner
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Paige DePol
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Thomas Jericke
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Paige DePol
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Thomas Jericke
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Paige DePol
- Re: Locking Table Member Additions, Sean Conner