On 30/03/14 07:40, Andy C wrote:
Here are results where numbers are normalized gains.
+----------------+-----------+------------+
| # of processes | random | linear |
+----------------+-----------+------------+
| 1 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
+----------------+-----------+------------+
| 2 | 1.97 | 1.76 |
+----------------+-----------+------------+
| 4 | 3.51 | 1.83 |
+----------------+-----------+------------+
| 8 | 4.24 | 1.86 |
+----------------+-----------+------------+
This is great stuff.
Let me make sure I read it correctly.
Having 2 processes makes a value 1.97 times higher than with 1 core in
the random case, and 1.76 times higher in the linear case, but what is
that value being measured?
Some form of throughput I suppose and not time, right?
The conclusion is that in practice two cores can easily saturate
memory buses. Accessing it in certain patters helps to some extend.
Although 8 cores is pretty much all what makes sense unless you do
tons of in cache stuff.
Indeed. It also means single threaded linear access isn't going to be
very much faster if you add more threads.
BTW, are you sure the threads were running in parallel on separate cores
and not just concurrently on a smaller number of cores?
As you said, this should be dependent on hardware and running this on
actual server machine would be as interesting.
--
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
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
