From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p3KCrjdM020661 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:53:45 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnABAIzWrk3VhjEVmWdsb2JhbACXcY1LFAEBAQEBCAsLBxQliG++ZIVxBJIhBw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,246,1301868000"; d="scan'208";a="106326857" Received: from ihsmtp01cons.lis.interhost.com ([213.134.49.21]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 20 Apr 2011 14:53:40 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.64] ([178.166.9.223]) by ihsmtp01cons.lis.interhost.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:53:30 +0100 Message-ID: <4DAED747.5060105@inescporto.pt> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:53:27 +0100 From: Hugo Ferreira User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr References: <2054357367.219171.1300974318806.JavaMail.root@zmbs4.inria.fr> <4D8BD02D.1010505@inria.fr> <4D8C73C8.6020801@inescporto.pt> <1301055903.8429.314.camel@thinkpad> <341494683.237537.1301057887481.JavaMail.root@zmbs4.inria.fr> <4D8C944A.9060601@inria.fr> <4D8CB859.9040709@inescporto.pt> <4D8CDDCC.4010000@ens-lyon.org> <4D8CEAA4.2030403@inescporto.pt> <1303244809.8429.1272.camel@thinkpad> <4DAE9278.4050701@inescporto.pt> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Apr 2011 12:53:30.0882 (UTC) FILETIME=[F3461620:01CBFF59] Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Efficient OCaml multicore -- roadmap? On 04/20/2011 01:30 PM, Markus Mottl wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 03:59, Hugo Ferreira wrote: >> Agreed. Currently I am using messaging via sexplib to send data-sets to >> slaves for processing and returns results to a master process the same >> way. But my objective is to share data structures and return partial >> results to a master process. Returning results requires messaging. > > Btw., why not use bin-prot instead of sexplib for messaging? It is > not human-readable, but otherwise comparable in convenience. It is > very much more efficient (especially for numeric data), both in terms > of processing speed and storage requirements. > Most of the data-set and the results are symbolic (sets of clauses in predicate logic) which are passed on as text to be parsed. Don't know if bin-prot helps any in this context. Thanks for the suggestion. Hugo F. > Regards, > Markus >