Go 1.12.1 and Go 1.11.6 are released

[Katie Hockman]

Hello gophers,

We have just released Go versions 1.12.1 and 1.11.6, minor point releases.

These releases include fixes to cgo, the compiler, the go command,

and the fmt, net/smtp, os, path/filepath, sync, and template packages.

View the release notes for more information:
    https://golang.org/doc/devel/release.html#go1.12.minor

You can download binary and source distributions from the Go web site:
    https://golang.org/dl/

To compile from source using a Git clone, update to the release with
"git checkout go1.12.1" and build as usual.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the release.

Cheers,
Katie for the Go team

[Guanhua Jiang]

Thanks for the note! Was hoping `math/pi` package to have been added on this date! :)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-announce" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-announ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Serhat Şevki Dinçer]

Hi,

I see a regression on speed with sorty tests (go test -short -gcflags '-B -s' -ldflags '-s -w') on my Intel Core i5-4210M laptop (also sortutil became faster, zermelo float became much slower):

with go 1.12.1

Sorting uint32
sortutil took 18.64s
zermelo took 10.92s
sorty-2 took 17.10s
sorty-3 took 14.22s
sorty-4 took 12.36s
sorty-5 took 12.10s

Sorting float32
sortutil took 18.03s
zermelo took 14.57s
sorty-2 took 19.27s
sorty-3 took 15.82s
sorty-4 took 13.93s
sorty-5 took 13.90s

with go 1.11.6 (consistent with 1.11.5)

Sorting uint32
sortutil took 25.18s
zermelo took 10.93s
sorty-2 took 15.85s
sorty-3 took 13.05s
sorty-4 took 11.27s
sorty-5 took 11.05s

Sorting float32
sortutil took 23.69s
zermelo took 8.89s
sorty-2 took 19.25s
sorty-3 took 15.42s
sorty-4 took 13.19s
sorty-5 took 13.09s

[Ian Lance Taylor]

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 1:46 PM Serhat Şevki Dinçer <jfcg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see a regression on speed with sorty tests (go test -short -gcflags '-B -s' -ldflags '-s -w') on my Intel Core i5-4210M laptop (also sortutil became faster, zermelo float became much slower):

Please open an issue with full details. Thanks.

Ian

[Michael Jones]

I don't have direct feedback on this, but I do have an observation based on my own faster-sort code, which is that timing seems about the same, and scaling seems different than this report.

The sorty_test.go file starts with "const N = 1 << 28" so we're talking about sorting a 268,435,456-element array of ints. In that code, they are uint32s and float32s, in mine, 64-bit ints. I should be slower, but adjusting my benchmarks for this array size I see:

go standard library sort.Ints()

54669865378 ns/op

54.6 sec

my quicksort

21398838106 ns/op

21.3 sec (2.55x stdlib)

my parallel quicksort

5428725888 ns/op

5.4 sec (10.0x stdlib, 3.94x serial version on my 4 cpu macbook pro)

These are 64-bit values and 32-bit should is just slightly faster

5318033205 ns/op

5.3 sec

I don't see a slowdown here Go version to version. Of course 10x slower in the standard library vs tuned parallel is unfortunate.

Michael

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Michael T. Jones
michae...@gmail.com