Ironically, there's a TODO comment about that in the source of
Data.ByteString.Lazy, just below 'copy':
-- TODO defrag func that concatenates block together that are below a threshold
-- defrag :: ByteString -> ByteString
2010/1/23 Gregory Crosswhite <[email protected]>:
> I would say that counts as cheating because it assumes that knowledge of the
> input in advance. However, I wonder how it would perform if there were a
> "reChunk" function that lazily built a new lazy ByteString by merging smaller
> chunks together --- i.e., it would keep pullings chunks from the ByteString
> until it reached some threshold size, merge them into a single strict
> ByteString chunk, and then recursively continue processing the rest of the
> lazy ByteString in this manner.
> On Jan 22, 2010, at 7:30 AM, Tom Nielsen wrote:
>>> It seems to me this indicates that the big expense here is the call into
>>> the I/O system.
>> So let's make fewer I/O calls:
>> import Control.Monad
>> import qualified Data.ByteString.Char8 as S
>> import System.IO
>> null_str1 = S.concat $ take 1000 $ repeat $ S.pack "null"
>> n1 = 5000000 `div` 1000
>> main = withBinaryFile "out3.json" WriteMode $ \h -> do
>> hPutStr h "["
>> replicateM_ n1 (S.hPutStr h null_str1)
>> hPutStr h "]"
>> this is 10x faster. Whether this is cheating or not depends on what
>> John actually wants to do.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> [email protected]
Web IR developer, market.yandex.ru
Haskell-Cafe mailing list