Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2006
Dave Mitchell wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 04:25:33PM +0200, demerphq wrote: > >> I think we need to take some time on the speed issue. >> > > Is there a speed issue? > > yes - the issue is that its hard to tell whether the 'average' change helps or not. In my limited experience, perlbench has 2-4 % noise in repeated tests on the same perl. This will hide many real perf effects. I had expected 'some' effect from the arena hacks I submitted, but couldnt construct a test-case file that showed anything consistent (w my expectations) I vaguely recall even purposely pessimizing some stuff to see if it slowed down. I didnt get any satisfaction. Which is not to blame perlbench; I looked a bit at it, and (no suprise) I couldnt see anything obviously wrong. It may be that a malloc-happy prog like perl will forever be stochastic in its performance. The last 5% is hard - in everything, and Im certainly too lazy to seriously contemplate the idea that I can do better than Gisle. In touching perlbench, there are 95 ways backwards, and 5 forward. Those are not good odds for a random walk.Thread Previous | Thread Next