Re: MPS: weak hash tables

["Gerd Möllmann" <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>]

Pip Cet <pipcet@protonmail.com> writes:

> On Sunday, July 7th, 2024 at 04:27, Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ihor Radchenko yantar92@posteo.net writes:
>> > Gerd Möllmann gerd.moellmann@gmail.com writes:
>> > 
>> > > So, we had 14 * 64M total before, and 16 * 64M afterwards. A bit more
>> > > makes sense since we now have GMP objects, but a dramatic improvement?
>> > > ...
>> > > 
>> > > That's the only thing I can come up with ATM. Complete guesswork, of
>> > > course. I wonder how one would find an "optimal" configuration at all.
>> > 
>> > I feel kind of silly, but
>> > https://memory-pool-system.readthedocs.io/en/latest/guide/perf.html
>> > maybe? It has an example of "dramatic improvement".
>> 
>> Interestingly, the 3 gens have the opposite effect with the Helmut showed.
>> 
>> master passed 27/54 ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (5.857224 sec)
>> 2-gen passed 27/54 ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (80.113908 sec)
>> 3-gen passed 27/54 ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (142.356406 sec)
>
> I'm confused by that test. I see similar results to you when I "make lisp/emacs-lisp/ert-tests", but when I run the test directly it finishes quickly:
>
> $ ../src/emacs -Q --batch -f igc--collect -l lisp/emacs-lisp/ert-tests.el --eval '(ert-run-tests-batch-and-exit "ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive")'
>
> Running 1 tests (2024-07-07 06:00:57-0000, selector ‘"ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive"’)
>    passed  1/1  ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (1.079868 sec)
>
> Ran 1 tests, 1 results as expected, 0 unexpected (2024-07-07 06:00:58-0000, 1.080000 sec)
>
>
> What's going on here?
>
> Pip

I see the same

  % ../src/emacs -Q --batch -f igc--collect -l lisp/emacs-lisp/ert-tests.el --eval '(ert-run-tests-batch-and-exit "ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive")'
  Running 1 tests (2024-07-07 09:29:07+0200, selector ‘"ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive"’)
     passed  1/1  ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (2.679200 sec)

  Ran 1 tests, 1 results as expected, 0 unexpected (2024-07-07 09:29:10+0200, 2.679337 sec)

3-gen case, 140s down to 2.5. Wot?