From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F166ABB81 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:11:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k1GIBG3G004135 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:11:16 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA14991 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:11:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from hedwig1.umh.ac.be (hedwig2.umh.ac.be [193.190.193.73]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k1GIBFZa004126 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:11:15 +0100 Received: from poincare (Debian-exim@poincare.swapping.umh.ac.be [10.102.100.30]) by hedwig1.umh.ac.be (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k1GIEIVS2396382; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:14:20 +0100 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] ident=trch) by poincare with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1F9naw-0002XW-3l; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:11:10 +0100 Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:11:09 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <20060216.191109.119174763.Christophe.Troestler@umh.ac.be> To: OCaml Mailing List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How to write efficient threaded programs on OCaml From: Christophe TROESTLER In-Reply-To: <87mzgv1rnv.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> References: <20060208.001547.81488614.Christophe.Troestler@umh.ac.be> <87mzgv1rnv.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> X-Face: #2fb%mPx>rRL@4ff~TVgZ"<[:,oL"`TUEGK/[8/qb58~C>jR(x4A+v/n)7BgpEtIph_neoL KJBq0JBY9:}8v|j Organization: Universite de Mons-Hainaut (http://math.umh.ac.be/an/) X-Spook: Rand Corporation brigand fissionable pink noise plutonium ICE Sears Tower Watergate genetic Capricorn X-Blessing: Om Ah Hum Vajra Guru Pema Siddhi Hum X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux (http://www.linux.org/) X-Mailer-URL: http://www.mew.org/ X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2.53 on Emacs 22.0.50 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.1 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43F4C044.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43F4C043.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 umh:01 ocaml:01 cheers:01 73%:98 18%:98 wrote:01 debian:02 debian:02 caml:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Christophe TROESTLER: > > > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=chameneos&lang=all > > A qprof profiling reveals that OCaml is spending 63-73% of its time on > > the function caml_process_pending_signals and 13-18% on > > pthread_cond_signal. > > Could this be a measuring artifact? It seems that all Caml code is > accounted for in caml_process_pending_signals. Maybe. This is why I asked on the maling list : to have the opinions of people more knowledgeable than me on this subject. Cheers, ChriS