Gmail Calendar Documents Reader Web more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
Results
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  3 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Thorsten Zachmann  
View profile  
 More options Jul 29 2008, 3:02 am
From: Thorsten Zachmann <g...@zagge.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:02:59 +0200
Local: Tues, Jul 29 2008 3:02 am
Subject: Results
Hello,

I have implemented a wf10 in C++ using 537 LOC. When using with standard c++
allocator the program needs:

real    5m31.650s
user    66m29.504s
sys     4m44.607s

By switching to the hoard allocator as outlined in Christoph Bartoschek's mail
this goes down to:

real    4m41.376s
user    54m6.374s
sys     4m5.561s

I made the same observations as Christoph that when you can manage to have
some data in the cache the time goes down to:

real    4m0.770s
user    53m20.249s
sys     4m29.073s

but that as you see the cpu time that is used is nearly the same so only the
speedup due to the disk caches help. If run again the values from above come
up again.

This is with 14 threads working on the counting of the data and 8 threads
reading the data.

Have a nice day,

Thorsten


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Christoph Bartoschek  
View profile  
 More options Jul 29 2008, 3:36 am
From: Christoph Bartoschek <goo...@pontohonk.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:36:45 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Tues, Jul 29 2008 3:36 am
Subject: Re: Results
Hi,

Congratulations. This is a very good result.
For me you have proven that having a good idea to parallelize a
program is more important than the technical implementation.

Could you also show us the code?


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Thorsten Zachmann  
View profile  
 More options Jul 29 2008, 3:18 pm
From: Thorsten Zachmann <g...@zagge.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:18:56 +0200
Local: Tues, Jul 29 2008 3:18 pm
Subject: Re: Results
Hello,

> Congratulations. This is a very good result.

Thanks.

> For me you have proven that having a good idea to parallelize a
> program is more important than the technical implementation.
> Could you also show us the code?

I have uploaded the code to my webside. You can download it here:

http://www.zagge.de/wf2/wf10.tar.gz

Have a nice day,

Thorsten


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google