Re: MPS: weak hash tables

[Gerd Möllmann]

Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com> writes:

> Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> So, we had 14 * 64M total before, and 16 * 64M afterwards. A bit more
>>> makes sense since we now have GMP objects, but a dramatic improvement?
>>> ...
>>>
>>> That's the only thing I can come up with ATM. Complete guesswork, of
>>> course. I wonder how one would find an "optimal" configuration at all.
>>
>> I feel kind of silly, but
>> https://memory-pool-system.readthedocs.io/en/latest/guide/perf.html
>> maybe? It has an example of "dramatic improvement".
>
> Interestingly, the 3 gens have the opposite effect with the Helmut showed.
>
>    master       passed  27/54  ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (5.857224 
> sec)
>    2-gen        passed  27/54  ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (80.113908 
> sec)
>    3-gen        passed  27/54  ert-test-run-tests-batch-expensive (142.356406 
> sec)

And, BTW, if someone knows why the test is named expensive please let me
know. I suppose someone must have had an idea when naming the test. I
don't see it.