From: Christophe Raffalli <email@example.com> To: Xavier Leroy <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: caml users <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Sequential speed 4.12.0 vs 4.13.1 vs multicore (Was: The road to OCaml 5.0) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2021 17:37:50 -1000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20211010033750.rxa23jdifilpdetr@oulala> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAH=h3gHPepzVA0cHCkP+8qZ3_LTNLggpQdRWv+jtDyDE1ZE_gA@mail.gmail.com> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1247 bytes --] Hello, First I have cleaned the inlining instruction and get better result leting flambda deciding alone. This leads to 36s with 4.13.1 sequential 36s with 4.12.0 sequential 32s with 4.12.0 multicore (but not using any parralelism) So being more reasonable with inlining annotation yields no more changes between 4.13.1 and 4.12.0. Still I am surprised that multicore is better (should expect a bit worth ?) > > Christophe: please put your benchmark online somewhere so that we can make our > measurements. Without reproducibility, your initial message is useless. > Thanks. The code is there (it uses functors a lot, could be a good bench for flambda): https://github.com/craff/hypersurfaces.git and depends from (opam version might not be sufficient) https://github.com/craff/gles3.git https://github.com/craff/pacomb.git and other opam packages. If you "opam pin ." the three git repos above everything should work. The command to test: dune exec --release Hyper -- tests/hard/hilbert-sextic.txt -b It prints its own timing as below among other messages: total: 36.329s ( 0.012s self) for 1 call(s) You can use other files in tests or tests/hard. > - Xavier Leroy > H [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-10 3:38 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-07 9:48 [Caml-list] The road to OCaml 5.0 Florian Angeletti 2021-10-08 1:42 ` Francois Berenger 2021-10-08 20:34 ` Christophe Raffalli 2021-10-09 0:07 ` [Caml-list] Sequential speed 4.12.0 vs 4.13.1 vs multicore (Was: The road to OCaml 5.0) Christophe Raffalli 2021-10-09 0:58 ` Michael Bacarella 2021-10-09 1:11 ` Michael Bacarella 2021-10-09 1:20 ` Michael Bacarella 2021-10-09 2:10 ` Christophe Raffalli 2021-10-09 17:20 ` Xavier Leroy 2021-10-10 3:37 ` Christophe Raffalli [this message] 2021-10-09 17:14 ` ygrek
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 * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20211010033750.rxa23jdifilpdetr@oulala \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: [Caml-list] Sequential speed 4.12.0 vs 4.13.1 vs multicore (Was: The road to OCaml 5.0)' \ /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
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).