From: Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com>
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: guile-devel <guile-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Extremely high overhead of 'par-map'
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:24:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+U71=PjPgo-jnL_EFBW0+MBCMsKjs3bBVt9Hq4k_cpDXdyb9Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878v56agp1.fsf_-_@tines.lan>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1098 bytes --]
I agree. Do you have any idea what's causing the overhead?
I tried to benchmark it, but got a segmentation fault. I think we have
plenty of work to do here. :-)
Noah
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> wrote:
> I wrote:
>
> > Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> writes:
> >> --------------------cut-------------------
> >> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (map (lambda (x) (expt x 5)) (iota
> >> 10000)))
> >> ;; 0.008019s real time, 0.007979s run time. 0.000000s spent in GC.
> >> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (par-map (lambda (x) (expt x 5))
> >> (iota 10000)))
> >> ;; 6.596471s real time, 6.579375s run time. 1.513880s spent in GC.
> >> --------------------end-------------------
> > [...]
> >> Well, is there any example?
> >
> > The timings above suggest that, on your machine, the overhead of
> > 'par-map' is in the neighborhood of 660 microseconds per thread (that's
> > the total run time divided by 10000 iterations).
>
> I must say that 'par-map' has shockingly poor performance.
> We really ought to try to improve this.
>
> Mark
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1703 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-29 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1355559152.27310.5.camel@Renee-desktop.suse>
[not found] ` <87y5d8rclr.fsf@gnu.org>
2013-03-28 2:55 ` Whats' the proper senario of par-map? (Was Re: bug#13188: par-map causes VM stack overflow) Nala Ginrut
2013-03-28 5:05 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-28 13:44 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-03-28 18:00 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-28 20:07 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-03-29 2:36 ` Nala Ginrut
2013-03-29 5:49 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-29 6:00 ` Extremely high overhead of 'par-map' Mark H Weaver
2013-03-29 20:24 ` Noah Lavine [this message]
2013-03-29 20:27 ` Noah Lavine
2013-03-29 23:18 ` Mark H Weaver
2013-03-30 23:37 ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-03-29 16:45 ` Whats' the proper senario of par-map? (Was Re: bug#13188: par-map causes VM stack overflow) Mark H Weaver
2013-04-01 19:10 ` Andy Wingo
2013-03-29 9:52 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CA+U71=PjPgo-jnL_EFBW0+MBCMsKjs3bBVt9Hq4k_cpDXdyb9Q@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=noah.b.lavine@gmail.com \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mhw@netris.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).