From cae788d5608b287b2c970ab28c0361350a5c7e95 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrew Tridgell Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 01:51:36 +0000 Subject: r9773: r11599@blu: tridge | 2005-08-30 11:55:57 +1000 optimise this case a bit more. The total speedup using non-indexed ldbtest is now around a factor of 80x. The code is ugly as hell, but I think this speed is worth it. Of course, if we only ever do indexed searches in ldb then this doesn't help, but it seems all too common that we get unindexable searches, so the optimisation is worthwhile (This used to be commit 2e14fb893dd9815cdb2488c630131dc549e5c361) --- source4/lib/tdb/common/tdb.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'source4') diff --git a/source4/lib/tdb/common/tdb.c b/source4/lib/tdb/common/tdb.c index 8e8e3ce3b3..d6861efe13 100644 --- a/source4/lib/tdb/common/tdb.c +++ b/source4/lib/tdb/common/tdb.c @@ -1276,14 +1276,22 @@ static int tdb_next_lock(TDB_CONTEXT *tdb, struct tdb_traverse_lock *tlock, semantics don't change. With a non-indexed ldb search this trick gains us a - factor of more than 10 in speed on a linux 2.6.x - system. + factor of around 80 in speed on a linux 2.6.x + system (testing using ldbtest). */ if (!tlock->off && tlock->hash != 0) { u32 off; - if (ofs_read(tdb, TDB_HASH_TOP(tlock->hash), &off) == 0 && - off == 0) { - continue; + if (tdb->map_ptr) { + for (;tlock->hash < tdb->header.hash_size;tlock->hash++) { + if (0 != *(u32 *)(TDB_HASH_TOP(tlock->hash) + (unsigned char *)tdb->map_ptr)) { + break; + } + } + } else { + if (ofs_read(tdb, TDB_HASH_TOP(tlock->hash), &off) == 0 && + off == 0) { + continue; + } } } -- cgit