[Libreoffice] Should the Thesaurus/mythes use a precomputed index (installer file size)

Norbert Thiebaud nthiebaud at gmail.com
Sun Jan 30 03:29:44 PST 2011

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:32 AM, Steve Butler <sebutler at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> On 29 January 2011 21:45, Steve Butler <sebutler at gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's some comparison timings on the above system (measured with
> gettimeofday either side of the call in swriter).
> Using an INDEX FILE:
> US Thesaurus - cold OS cache
> 2011/01/30 04:21:37.887449: Loaded in 0.097378 seconds.
> US Thesaurus - hot OS cache
> 2011/01/30 04:22:37.338682: Loaded in 0.044813 seconds.
> US Thesaurus - cold OS cache
> 2011/01/30 10:07:42.186452: Loaded in 0.253337 seconds.
> US Thesaurus - hot OS cache
> 2011/01/30 10:08:01.737888: Loaded in 0.130883 seconds.
> As can be seen from these numbers, it is around 3x slower for the US
> thesaurus regardless of hot/cold cache.
> Now, assuming anyone thinks this is a good idea and the tradeoff of
> initial lookup speed vs installation size is appropriate, I would
> appreciate pointers as to how we would go about packaging up such a
> change when it is completely isolated to messing about with 3rd party
> source.  Naturally if this approach was selected then building the
> .idx files and adding them to the language pack zips would need to be
> removed.  A further option could be to have it use idx files if they
> exist, but fallback to using only the .dat files.

I have only skimmed this thread, so forgive me if i missed the mark but:

why not generate the index at install time ?
that will still achieve the goal of reducing the size of the
installer, without the performance hit at runtime no?


> Regards,
> Steven Butler
> _______________________________________________
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

More information about the LibreOffice mailing list