From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1C99BBAF for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:34:06 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvUBANX1ukrUnwdkkWdsb2JhbACCIZhgAQEBAQcNCgcTBLpchBsF X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,445,1249250400"; d="scan'208";a="33429970" Received: from relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net ([212.159.7.100]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 24 Sep 2009 13:34:06 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvgFAAv2ukrUnw6T/2dsb2JhbACCIdNzhBsF Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net ([212.159.14.147]) by relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 24 Sep 2009 12:34:06 +0100 Received: from [87.114.87.187] (helo=leper.local) by ptb-relay03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1MqmaM-0004YW-0h for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:34:06 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OC4MC : OCaml for Multicore architectures Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:45:20 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <200909240247.17560.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20090924094943.GA14407@annexia.org> In-Reply-To: <20090924094943.GA14407@annexia.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200909241245.20432.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Plusnet-Relay: 8fd8290fe15bea7ac1996a790ff14400 X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 0100,:01 2009:98 2009:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 threaded:03 thu:05 sep:06 mean:08 obvious:10 scaling:10 scaling:10 On Thursday 24 September 2009 10:49:43 Richard Jones wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 02:47:17AM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote: > > Wow! 2.6x faster on 2 cores is good. ;-) > > Isn't that impossible? Or is the multicore GC better than the single > threaded one? (Sorry if this is a stupid or obvious question) Superlinear scaling is entirely possible because more cores can mean more cache in play. However, I have only seen superlinear scaling on AMD hardware and not Intel hardware. -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e