On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Jim - FooBar(); <jimpil1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, so I followed your suggestions and the block size did the trick with > regards to using all 4 cores of mine...However, even so, I get no > performance improvements!!! It still needs close to 4 min to go to level 4 > and it still needs 5-6 sec to go to level 2 (a tiny bit faster than the > sequential equivalent)... You should see a close to *4 speed up, at least in the level 4. One thing that could happen is if some of your functions are using an atom or a reference and the threads keeps bumping into each other and retrying. Are you sure that both next-level and core-by-count are pure functions? (And any other that are used in the search....)
> 3)I'm not sure I understand what you mean...You're returning nil - I'm > returning a very small number, > they can both be read by the next branch don't they? The problem is that (:value Integer/MIN_VALUE) is nil, which looks like a bug and make your code hard to understand. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
