[Fontconfig] Fontconfig performance question.

Keith Packard keithp at keithp.com
Fri May 9 01:45:18 EST 2003

Around 17 o'clock on May 8, Krzysztof Dabrowski wrote:

> After such mapping you would have to "parse" it somehow anyway otherwise you 
> will have realy slow access to the whole thing in the memory.

A carefully designed format should be interpretable by the library with 
minimal parsing -- reformatting the data would increase memory usage which 
obviates a lot of the utility of a mapped file.

> But such serialisation would be realy dependant on the structure format - any 
> change in the structure would require a new serialiser.

That's a significant issue.  We have versioned cache file names, but it 
would be best if the format could remain compatible across several 
versions of the library.

> I'm realy not against the daemon thing. It could be realy transparent - if
> you have it up and running - fontconfig could obtain it's data from it. If
> it's not up and running it can fall back to the old behaviour. 30% of app's
> startup time is worth it in my opinion.

A solution which doesn't depend on shared memory among processes will 
reduce security and stability issues.  Let's see how far we can get 
without that.


More information about the Fontconfig mailing list