Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upgrade to v0.7 and test organization #2

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 20, 2018
Merged

Upgrade to v0.7 and test organization #2

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 20, 2018

Conversation

mohamed82008
Copy link
Owner

This PR upgrades the package to v0.7 and does some re-organization of the tests, no functional change. The following is the test result now on my machine with 4 threads.

   Testing KissThreading
 Resolving package versions...
--------
tmap!
  5.181783 seconds (2.50 M allocations: 6.239 GiB, 26.16% gc time)
simple
  4.539470 seconds (4.43 M allocations: 6.178 GiB, 18.73% gc time)
Test Summary:  | Pass  Total
bootstrap test |    2      2
--------
tmap!
  5.758912 seconds (75.22 k allocations: 11.480 MiB)
simple
  6.008049 seconds (67.87 k allocations: 10.969 MiB)
Test Summary: | Pass  Total
bubblesort    |    2      2
--------
tmap!
  1.716371 seconds (209.28 k allocations: 772.499 MiB, 2.42% gc time)
simple
  1.617466 seconds (69.59 k allocations: 765.968 MiB)
Test Summary: | Pass  Total
sort_batch    |    2      2
--------
threaded
  0.040570 seconds (16 allocations: 384 bytes)
unthreaded
  0.127004 seconds (5 allocations: 176 bytes)
Test Summary:       | Pass  Total
summation: getrange |    1      1
========
   Testing KissThreading tests passed

@mohamed82008 mohamed82008 mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2018
@bkamins
Copy link
Collaborator

bkamins commented Jul 11, 2018

Thanks. Looks good, but I will review it in a few days and merge.

The only comment is that I will redesign the random number generation part to avoid NUMA issues (to make sure that each thread allocates its own PRNGs and there will be no need of droping one). But this is for later (and as noted in #1 if 0.7 is bad with Atomic probably introduce processing in batches).

@bkamins
Copy link
Collaborator

bkamins commented Jul 20, 2018

Thanks!

@bkamins bkamins closed this Jul 20, 2018
@bkamins bkamins reopened this Jul 20, 2018
@bkamins bkamins merged commit d0c9108 into mohamed82008:master Jul 20, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants