On 03.03.2018 17:44, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2018 at 04:32:35PM +0000, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> writes:
>>
>>> Which leads me to believe that r1778923 may have been based on wrong
>>> assumptions about performance. The new authz is not fast enough to
>>> significantly reduce per-request overhead.
>> My testing so far was with a very small authz file -- only a handful of
>> rules and aliases. If I add a few hundred trival rules to the file then
>> 1.11 becomes signifcantly slower than 1.9 while reverting is still much
>> faster:
>>
>> 1.9: 4.3s
>> trunk 1.11: 14.6s
>> reverted 1.11: 1.9s
> Thanks for testing and confirming this.
>
> I think our best course of action is to revert the change on trunk
> and in 1.10.x. Could you do that? (I could do it, too. I'm just asking
> you since you've probably already prepared it in a local copy.)
So if I understand this debate correctly: The authz code is so much
faster now that parsing the authz file and performing the authz lookups
beats calculating its MD5 checksum?
-- Brane
Received on 2018-03-03 18:01:29 CET