Hi Andy, the timings were collected with two litte macros I've written and which are available here: http://hg.postspectacular.com/macrochrono/src/tip/src/macrochrono.clj
The actual project in question will be released in the next few months, once things are more stable. I haven't run a profiler yet, but will try tomorrow... Thanks, K. On 3 October 2012 01:40, Andy Fingerhut <andy.finger...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not aware of what changes made in 1.4 could cause this performance > degradation. > > Out of curiosity, are you willing to share your code for performance > profiling of future Clojure versions? i.e. is it open source already and so > that wouldn't be a problem, or is it closed source? > > Have you run a profiler on your tests to see where the time is spent with > Clojure 1.3 vs Clojure 1.4? > > Andy > > On Oct 2, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Karsten Schmidt wrote: > >> Today, I decided to finally switch one of my projects from Clojure >> 1.3.0 to 1.4.0 (and test driving the 1.5.0 snapshot) but quickly found >> some discouraging effects in terms of performance. The project >> involves a lot of geometry and I'm using vanilla vectors for all >> vector math. So far I've *not* been using any type hints or casting, >> but was generally happy with the performance under 1.3.0... >> >> Under 1.3.0, e.g. a Delaunay triangulation of 5000 random 2D points >> resulting in approx. 9450 triangles takes: >> >> average 422ms / minimum 393ms - version with transients: avg. 358ms / min. >> 324ms >> >> The exact same code under 1.4.0: >> >> average 695ms / minimum 640ms - version with transients: avg. 672ms / min. >> 616ms >> >> That's 1.65x slower and the only thing changed is the clojure version >> number in project.clj. 1.5.0 snapshot is in the same league... :( Also >> note that the impact of transients is much reduced compared to >> 1.3.0... >> (All stats collected over 60sec duration.) >> >> Has there been another overhaul or behavior change of numerics in >> these recent versions? I'm really quite suprised/shocked by this find >> and can't explain it to myself. I was hoping to use the library also >> from CLJS in the future and hence have stayed away from adding type >> hints and explicit casting... >> >> Thanks for any insights! >> >> Best, K. > > -- > 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 -- Karsten Schmidt +44 7875 524 336 http://postspectacular.com | http://toxiclibs.org | http://toxi.co.uk -- 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
