I don't have direct feedback on this, but I do have an observation based on my own faster-sort code, which is that timing seems about the same, and scaling seems different than this report.
The sorty_test.go file starts with "const N = 1 << 28" so we're talking about sorting a 268,435,456-element array of ints. In that code, they are uint32s and float32s, in mine, 64-bit ints. I should be slower, but adjusting my benchmarks for this array size I see: go standard library sort.Ints() 54669865378 ns/op 54.6 sec my quicksort 21398838106 ns/op 21.3 sec (2.55x stdlib) my parallel quicksort 5428725888 ns/op 5.4 sec (10.0x stdlib, 3.94x serial version on my 4 cpu macbook pro) These are 64-bit values and 32-bit should is just slightly faster 5318033205 ns/op 5.3 sec I don't see a slowdown here Go version to version. Of course 10x slower in the standard library vs tuned parallel is unfortunate. Michael On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 4:35 PM Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 1:46 PM Serhat Şevki Dinçer <jfcga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I see a regression on speed with sorty tests (go test -short -gcflags > '-B -s' -ldflags '-s -w') on my Intel Core i5-4210M laptop (also sortutil > became faster, zermelo float became much slower): > > Please open an issue with full details. Thanks. > > Ian > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- *Michael T. jonesmichael.jo...@gmail.com <michael.jo...@gmail.com>* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
