RE: RE: RE: RE: RE (tilly) 2 (blame): File reading efficiency and other surly remarks

Those are very interesting results. I have tested my code on several diffrent OSes (Solaris and Linux) with several diffrent versions of perl (5.6,5.005, etc..) and the chunk method has always proven faster in my tests. What OS and version of perl did you test with?

Comment on RE: RE: RE: RE: RE (tilly) 2 (blame): File reading efficiency and other surly remarks

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE6 (tye): File reading efficiency and other surly remarks by tye (Sage) on Aug 26, 2000 at 21:30 UTC
Win98, Perl5.6.0 plus "ActiveState Build 615". Do you have any theories about why the buffering in perl's internals isn't implented as efficiently as your Perl code, especially considering the overhead involved in executing perl opcodes? - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")	[reply]
RE: RE6 (tye): File reading efficiency and other surly remarks by lhoward (Vicar) on Aug 26, 2000 at 23:33 UTC
It probably has to do with how ActiveState/WinPerl implements its IO layer vs. how traditional Perl on Unix implementes its IP layer. By the looks of things; it looks like your technique is faster under Windows/ActiveState while mine is faster under UNIX. Just another cross-platform gotcha to be aware of.	[reply]