You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Basically, slow part is vm.createContext, code execution speed itself is fine (benchmark with just vm.createContext({}) shows similar timings).
It looks like this problem exists only on Linux (node v8.1.2 on Darwin resure-osx 16.6.0 Darwin Kernel Version 16.6.0: Fri Apr 14 16:21:16 PDT 2017; root:xnu-3789.60.24~6/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64 is as fast as node 6).
Thanks for the bug report but this is a known issue that is currently under discussion in #14171. It's caused by the disabling of snapshots in the recent security release.
I don't want to be the sad party guy, but with node 8.4 we still get the same results as 8.1 for the test mentioned in this issue. I'm not sure we can consider this issue as closed. Can you update the status? Do we need to manually enable the snapshots?
I am almost certain this is because of #14875, so I think this can be closed as a duplicate of #14870 (or, technically, that one is a duplicate of this one, but, you know, it doesn’t really matter and the PR has the Fixes: tag for the other issue).
Activity
bnoordhuis commentedon Jul 14, 2017
Thanks for the bug report but this is a known issue that is currently under discussion in #14171. It's caused by the disabling of snapshots in the recent security release.
AurelienRibon commentedon Aug 16, 2017
I don't want to be the sad party guy, but with node 8.4 we still get the same results as 8.1 for the test mentioned in this issue. I'm not sure we can consider this issue as closed. Can you update the status? Do we need to manually enable the snapshots?
TimothyGu commentedon Aug 17, 2017
I can reproduce this.
On 8.1.2:
On 8.2.1:
On 8.4.0:
TimothyGu commentedon Aug 17, 2017
Seems like it was a bug in our build system that caused this :(
It will be fixed in #14875.
addaleax commentedon Aug 17, 2017
I am almost certain this is because of #14875, so I think this can be closed as a duplicate of #14870 (or, technically, that one is a duplicate of this one, but, you know, it doesn’t really matter and the PR has the
Fixes:tag for the other issue).