[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Whats' the proper senario of par-map? (Was Re: bug#13188: par-map ca
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: Whats' the proper senario of par-map? (Was Re: bug#13188: par-map causes VM stack overflow) |
Date: |
Mon, 01 Apr 2013 21:10:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) |
On Fri 29 Mar 2013 06:49, Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> writes:
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (map (lambda (x) (expt x 5)) (iota
>> 10000)))
>> ;; 0.008019s real time, 0.007979s run time. 0.000000s spent in GC.
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (par-map (lambda (x) (expt x 5))
>> (iota 10000)))
>> ;; 6.596471s real time, 6.579375s run time. 1.513880s spent in GC.
>
> The timings above suggest that, on your machine, the overhead of
> 'par-map' is in the neighborhood of 660 microseconds per thread (that's
> the total run time divided by 10000 iterations).
Per item, you mean? Anyway this seems like a really high overhead, and
we shouldn't make too many excuses for it ;)
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: Whats' the proper senario of par-map? (Was Re: bug#13188: par-map causes VM stack overflow),
Andy Wingo <=