Re: Very slow filter.cc

[Miroslaw Kwasniak]

On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 03:20:52PM +0100, Miroslaw Kwasniak wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 09:45:37AM +0100, David Bateman wrote:
> > 
> > t = cputime; y = filter(b,1,x); cputime - t
> > 
> > rather than using tic/toc and see if there is better consistency between 
> > 2.0.17 and the 2.1.x versions...

Test code:

 OCTAVE_VERSION
 x = randn(1e6,1);
 b = randn(500,1);
 t = cputime;
 y = filter(b,1,x);
 cputime - t

 
> $ sh run.sh
> OCTAVE_VERSION = 2.0.17
> ans = 2.0600
> OCTAVE_VERSION = 2.1.50
> ans = 15.380
> OCTAVE_VERSION = 2.1.57
> ans = 15.690
> OCTAVE_VERSION = 2.1.63
> ans = 14.060
> 
> 2.1.63 is a little better because it's compiled for 686 - rest are debian
> 386 packages.


The same machine as above (Athlon 1600XP), fresh cvs source

OCTAVE_VERSION = 2.1.64
ans = 4.1000

Hmmm, ...

Only important diff between 2.1.63/2.1.64 octave_config_info output:

-  CC_VERSION = 3.3.4 (Debian 1:3.3.4-13)
+  CC_VERSION = 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-5)
-  CXX_VERSION = 3.3.4
+  CXX_VERSION = 3.3.5



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------