perf: do thin LTO and singular codegen-unit on release
#970
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
CLA Assistant Lite bot All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅ |
|
I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA |
nitisht
added a commit
to parseablehq/.github
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2024
nitisht
reviewed
Oct 22, 2024
|
|
||
| [profile.release] | ||
| lto = "thin" | ||
| codegen-units = 1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is worth trying with FAT as well and see if we get any perf advantages. cc @nikhilsinhaparseable
de-sh
commented
Oct 22, 2024
Signed-off-by: Devdutt Shenoi <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #224 .
Description
Optimize release builds without impacting compile times. The alternatives include:
With single codegen-unit we make the compilation a bit slow, but that is much better tradeoff when compiling for releases given the optimizations that can be gained. Similarly, Fat LTO didn't give much of a gain from binary size perspective, have to figure out if there were any gains in terms of memory locality, but that is a harder question to answer, thus chose to go with Thin LTO.
This PR has: