From one of our sysadmins: "Searching a 1.6GB Firewall log, #ripgrep was 10x faster than regular grep." #rustlang /cc @burntsushi5
-
-
Replying to @jfredett @burntsushi5
Was the log cached in RAM in both cases? Why so much speed-up?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
(A 10x speedup on a single file is surprising, and while it's possible, there is likely something amiss. The log being cached is one possibility. Another possibility is that BSD grep was used instead of GNU grep.)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @burntsushi5 @muwlgr
It was on a Mac, ostensibly, so probably BSD Grep, AFAIK this was after the first run, so probably not cached.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jfredett @burntsushi5
You should repeat the test, with enough RAM to cache the whole file, at least 3 times with both grep versions, and record the lowest time you have measured
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @muwlgr @burntsushi5
Alternatively we can be happy that it went fast on first use and get back to regular work -- this wasn't an artificial benchmark, we had to find some stuff in a log and grep was taking a long time on my machine, so he grabbed ripgrep and tried it on his, it went fast.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @jfredett @burntsushi5
No. This kind of happiness is delusional in the long run. However, should this be explained to Apple fans? They will have to learn elementary OS principles sooner or later anyway
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Stop being an abrasive asshole. BSD grep is known to be slow. It is no special feat that ripgrep is faster than it. GNU grep is a different story. If you want benchmarks then eat your heart out: https://blog.burntsushi.net/ripgrep/
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.