<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_REOPENED " title="REOPENED - Performance concerns when larger CJK fonts are installed" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105085#c8">Comment # 8</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_REOPENED " title="REOPENED - Performance concerns when larger CJK fonts are installed" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105085">bug 105085</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:akira@tagoh.org" title="Akira TAGOH <akira@tagoh.org>"> Akira TAGOH</a> <pre>(In reply to Mingcong Bai from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=105085#c5">comment #5</a>) > If that's the case this is good news... I have tried .92 just yesterday but > it seemed to not like my old fontconfig xmls, spewing out a lot of parsing > errors - and reverted to "defaults", don't remember the specifics. Is there > a change resulted the change in fontconfig XML formatting? No idea. what errors did you see? such drastic changes shouldn't be made in config since 2.12.6 > Another thing is that it doesn't seem like the `faster` branch changes as > referenced in #64766 is merged with the master - could you clarify? > > I have re-opened the report as there's not a conclusive claim to improved > performance in this case. As we decided this is a dup of #64766, this obviously improved. see: On 2.12.6 $ time fc-cache -f /usr/share/fonts/google-noto-cjk fc-cache -f /usr/share/fonts/google-noto-cjk 186.64s user 0.43s system 96% cpu 3:13.38 total On git master $ time ./build/fc-cache/fc-cache -f /usr/share/fonts/google-noto-cjk ./build/fc-cache/fc-cache -f 0.19s user 0.04s system 9% cpu 2.281 total Hope that helps</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>