Proposal: New keydb format
Neal H. Walfield
neal at walfield.org
Sun Nov 1 21:51:40 CET 2015
At Sun, 1 Nov 2015 19:49:06 +0100,
Guilhem Moulin wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 at 01:58:00 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> > At Thu, 29 Oct 2015 15:28:28 +0100, Guilhem Moulin wrote:
> >> Care to look into that? I'd be happy to resume the benchmark later.
> > I spent a little bit of time on this this evening and found the bug.
> > I think --with-colons --list-sigs should now work.
> Thanks a lot! Yes indeed it does, and for my use case the performance is just
> amazing, especially with --list-sigs \o/ See the details below.
> However note that in order to create a keyring in keydb format I had to
> to apply to apply the following patch. (But I guess the proper fix
> would be to remove everything from and including the ‘;’ at the end of
> each SQL statement.)
I applied a patch similar to this to master, but I forgot to apply it
to the branch. I'm sorry about that.
> > Please feel free to run some benchmarks.
Thanks for these benchmarks. The results are overall very good, I
think. Particularly given that I haven't actually spent time
optimizing the code. Thanks to your work, you've given me a few
places to start.
FWIW, I think I know where the memory problem is and it should be
relatively easy to fix with little additional CPU overhead.
More information about the Gnupg-devel