From: Michael Bacarella <michael.bacarella@gmail.com>
To: Christophe Raffalli <christophe@raffalli.eu>
Cc: Florian Angeletti <florian.angeletti@inria.fr>, caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Sequential speed 4.12.0 vs 4.13.1 vs multicore (Was: The road to OCaml 5.0)
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 17:58:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK58AGFoHD2k3U5Fp49CDmCi=tmRjWKR1Fz5MR7ujFxWPXj6Hw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211009000722.otsy76prtixl226t@oulala>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1060 bytes --]
My gut here says you're unwittingly comparing regular ocaml to flambda
ocaml.
https://ocaml.org/manual/flambda.html
Perhaps multicore only comes in flambda flavor now (I notice it's not
available as a switch).
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 5:07 PM Christophe Raffalli <christophe@raffalli.eu>
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I managed to install ocaml 4.12.0 with multicore. I could not parallelise
> my
> code in 5mn ;-) but I check just the sequential speed and got a bit
> surprised. On the same examples, same options (flambda everywhere), etc ...
>
> Ex 1 Ex 2 Ex 3
> 4.13.1 normal 45s 12s 49s
> 4.12.0 normal 36s 11s 45s
> 4.12.0 multicore 31s 10s 40s
>
> These are not small differences and it is rather surprising that
>
> 4.13.1 is significantly slower than 4.12.0 (20 to 25%)
>
> 4.12.0 + multicore is faster on sequential code.
>
> Other people observe the same ?
> Any idea ? Should I report an issue for the speed degradation of 4.13.1 ?
>
> Christophe
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1586 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-09 0:58 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 [this message]
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
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='CAK58AGFoHD2k3U5Fp49CDmCi=tmRjWKR1Fz5MR7ujFxWPXj6Hw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=michael.bacarella@gmail.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=christophe@raffalli.eu \
--cc=florian.angeletti@inria.fr \
/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 NNTP newsgroup(s).