Mike Lambert wrote:
> Should this be a configure.pl-determined constant? Should we hardcode it
> to sizeof(void*)? Is this behavior guaranteed by the C spec? Can we
> assume it across all platforms even if it is not guaranteed?
I would be in favour of making it configuration-determined, just in
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 04:17:30AM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
> > Just to complete this thread, I have committed the current version of my
> > COW code, as I promised earlier this week.
>
> Did you try running tests with GC_DEBUG on? I get numerous failures.
> Here's a patch with a couple of fix
> Some final 5000 life results from my system, and a few improvements
> I believe are still possible:
>
> Before COW: 172 seconds
> After COW: 121 seconds
> A 30% improvement in performance is not too bad, I suppose.
> Well done Mike!
Thanks!
> CVS/COW with stack pointer alignment = four: 93 sec
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 04:17:30AM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
> Just to complete this thread, I have committed the current version of my
> COW code, as I promised earlier this week.
Did you try running tests with GC_DEBUG on? I get numerous failures.
Here's a patch with a couple of fixes (not all
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 02:10:22PM +0200, Peter Gibbs wrote:
> Mike Lambert wrote:
> > If you don't mind, please feel free to continue your work on parrot-grey.
> The problem arises with trying to do new experimental development,
> which still keeping sufficiently in sync with cvs parrot that I ca
Yay! The COW has landed! All praise the newly bovine Parrot! (Now
THAT's an odd image... gimp, anyone?)
Favorite quote from the patch:
+ /* Buffer's memory data is in this header's header pool's memory pool */
Many thanks to Peter and Mike for implementing this and pushing it all
the way throug
Mike Lambert wrote:
> Just to complete this thread, I have committed the current version of my
> COW code, as I promised earlier this week.
Some final 5000 life results from my system, and a few improvements
I believe are still possible:
Before COW: 172 seconds
After COW: 121 seconds
A 30% imp
Just to complete this thread, I have committed the current version of my
COW code, as I promised earlier this week. Below is my response to Peter's
most recent email.
> > Note that the comparison against parrot-grey is not
> > exactly fair, because it dodn't use system stackwalking.
>
> Note that
Mike Lambert wrote:
> Note that the comparison against parrot-grey is not
> exactly fair, because it dodn't use system stackwalking.
Note that I have only commented out the call to the stackwalk
function - for COW benchmarking purposes you could always
reinstate it. But that is beside the point
> Here are some timings on my system with your basic stats patch:
> These results are taken when the first command input is expected,
> having keyed-ahead the N to avoid delays.
Technically, the patch I gave you doesn't count the delay waiting for user
input. But there are other things to discuss
]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [perl #16269] [PATCH] COW...Again and Again
> Here are some timings on my system with your basic stats patch:
> These results are taken when the first command input is expected,
> having keyed-ahead the N to av
Here are some timings on my system with your basic stats patch:
These results are taken when the first command input is expected,
having keyed-ahead the N to avoid delays.
CVS + COW: (using your original cow patch)
Took 36.080085 seconds. A total of 2412496 bytes were allocated
A total of 18 DOD
> The thot plickens!
Unforunately...yes. :)
> My results for the above are:
> Interpreter version Time Data size
> CVS8s1320kB
> CVS + ML COW 20s 19172kB
> CVS + Grey15s1884kB
> CVS + ML COW - re
Mike Lambert wote:
> Run languages/basic/basic.pl.
> Type "LOAD WUMPUS, and hit return.
> Type "RUN", and hit return.
> Type "N" and hit return.
The thot plickens!
My results for the above are:
Interpreter version Time Data size
CVS8s1320kB
CVS +
> Elapsed times for 'time parrot hanoi.pbc 14 > /dev/null' are:
> CVS: 52.81, 52.05, 52.33
> CVS + grey COW: 51.53, 52.06, 51.67
> CVS + Mike's COW: 44.31, 44.48, 44.55
> CVS + grey1: 35.89, 36.48, 36.60 (+COW +cyclecount -stackwalk)
> End June grey: 30.14, 29.35, 29.53
>
> And 5000 generations of
Hi Mike
Elapsed times for 'time parrot hanoi.pbc 14 > /dev/null' are:
CVS: 52.81, 52.05, 52.33
CVS + grey COW: 51.53, 52.06, 51.67
CVS + Mike's COW: 44.31, 44.48, 44.55
CVS + grey1: 35.89, 36.48, 36.60 (+COW +cyclecount -stackwalk)
End June grey: 30.14, 29.35, 29.53
And 5000 generations of life
At 8:53 AM + 8/17/02, Mike Lambert (via RT) wrote:
>
>However, in the interest of saving someone from updating yet-another COW
>patch in the long-distant future because this wasn't applied (similar to
>how Peter's patch got left to bit-rot), can we try to reach a closure on
>this patch (either
# New Ticket Created by Mike Lambert
# Please include the string: [perl #16269]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16269 >
I finally was able to get Peter's old COW patch up and running with our
current codebas
18 matches
Mail list logo
