Debian (host) "'4,855 per second'" Ubuntu (vbox) "'4,709 per second'"
Win XP (vbox) "'504.099 per second'" The difference here is just one order of magnitude and not two... so maybe I should take apart CompileMethod>>putSource:inFile:withPreambule statement by statement. Is there some more convenient way to do it than wrap each statement in a block? Some way to profile a method or something. Peter On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 30 Jun 2015, at 18:36, Peter Uhnák <i.uh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I think we've safely established that the bottleneck is disk operations. > > Let's take it one level down then, > > [ 'foo.txt' asFileReference in: [ :file | > file writeStreamDo: [ :out | > 3 timesRepeat: [ out << String loremIpsum ] ]. > file ensureDelete ] ] bench > > => "'512.595 per second'" > > We could experiment with variants, calling #flush, writing by character, > adding buffering, etc, but this is a start. At least this takes the source > code stuff out of the equations. > > > Quoting from previous emails... > > > > store := [ > > method putSource: code inFile: 2 > > withPreamble: [:f | f cr; nextPut: $!; > nextChunkPut: 'Behavior method'; cr]. > > ]. > > > > machine 1: > > Debian 64bit (laptop) > > store bench. 41604 per second > > > > Windows XP 32bit (virtualbox; host Debian) > > store bench. 286 per second > > > > Ubuntu 32bit (virtualbox; host Debian) > > store bench. 36604 per second > > > > machine 2: > > Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (desktop pc) > > store bench. 13 per second > > > > machine 3: > > Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit (laptop) > > store bench. 454 per second > > > > all disks are HDD. > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < > marianop...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:03 PM, p...@highoctane.be <p...@highoctane.be> > wrote: > > Silly question: do you have a couple of Nautilus windows open? > > > > Loading stuff generates annoucements and Nautilus updates are killing > performance. > > > > > > And previously TestRunner too (don;t know now) > > > > Phil > > > > Le 30 juin 2015 00:36, "Jan Blizničenko" <blizn...@fit.cvut.cz> a écrit > : > > And one another benchmark of linux in VM on that desktop PC: > > Roassal loading - 58 s > > compilations per second - avg: 262.4682, min: 257.194, max: 289.684 > > ...so the desktop PC is capable of better result and problem is > somewhere in > > Windows, which I was afraid of... > > > > I'd also like to add to previous Windows tests that with antivirus > turned on > > everything takes more time approximately by half of original time. > > > > Jan > > > > > > Jan Blizničenko wrote > > > Desktop: 386 s. > > > Notebook: 48 s. > > > Linux in VM on notebook: 27 s. > > > > > > > > > Notebook: compilations per second - avg: 217.7153, min: 5.0, max: > 247.258 > > > Desktop: compilations per second - avg: 23.1337, min: 19.448, max: > 28.155 > > > Linux in VM on notebook: compilations per second - avg: > 529.0066600000001, > > > min: 5.0, max: 573.97 > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Slow-compilation-on-one-of-my-Windows-PCs-tp4834668p4834713.html > > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Mariano > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > >
