--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-09 09:24
---
*** Bug 21820 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-04 19:50
---
With array size=2000, timings are:
g77: 2.30 s
gfortran-4.0 (without commited patch): 17.0
gfortran-mainline: 2.66 s
intel: 3.15 s
I think we can close this PR.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org change
--- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-07 20:02
---
Subject: Bug 16339
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-07 20:02:28
Modified files:
libgfortran: ChangeLog
libgfortran/io : io.h unix.c
--- Additional Comments From jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot fi 2005-06-05
21:19 ---
Some further thoughts on this issue:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-06/msg00084.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16339
--- Additional Comments From jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot fi 2005-06-04
17:50 ---
It seems that with current mainline, while gfortran still loses to g77 and
ifort, the difference isn't that large. Executing via strace shows that writes
are nowadays done in 8k blocks, which probably explain
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-03-04
10:47 ---
This is really _very_ inefficient, by a factor of 20.
Some test numbers:
$ g77 write-record.f
$ time ./a.out
real0m1.819s
user0m1.774s
sys 0m0.044s
$ gfortran write-record.f
$ time ./a.out
