[Pharo-project] A tinyBenchmark

Levente Uzonyi leves at elte.hu
Fri Feb 11 00:00:14 CET 2011


On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Felipe Ba?ados Schwerter wrote:

> Hi Everybody! This is my first post on the list, even though i've been
> subscribed for more than 6 months.
>
> 2011/2/10 Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu>
>
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Torsten Bergmann wrote:
>>
>>  see http://fbanados.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/a-tinybenchmark
>>>
>>> Maybe Eliot is able to say something here on the main
>>> differences between Cog <-> VW VM.
>>>
>>
>> You made several mistakes:
>> - You didn't post the source code for #tinyBenchmarks. Do all those
>> Smalltalks implement it? Are the implementations equal?
>>
>
> No, they don't implement it. Just Pharo and Squeak. I just added the same
> implementation to Integer in VA, VisualWorks and GNU Smalltalk (
> Integer>>tinyBenchmarks, Integer>>benchmark and Integer>>benchFib), so the
> source code is the same.

Cool. I've ported #tinyBenchmarks to Clamato and also tried StrongTalk. I 
had to rewrite the code to make it run on both of them.

>
> - You didn't specify the version numbers for the VMs used. Or if you built
>> them yourself, then the sourcecode + compiler version + configuration
>> parameters. Without these your measurements can't be reproduced.
>>
>
> Every System was the one available from their websites. (Got Pharo 1.2 from
> Hudson about 3 days ago.)  However, VisualWorks is not available from its
> website right now. I installed it from a Cincom CD-ROM I got on Smalltalks
> 2010 .

It makes sense, just note it.

>
>
>> - There are two different Cog VMs. You didn't specify which one did you use
>> with Pharo.
>>
>
> Smalltalk vmVersion returns 'Croquet Closure Cog VM [CoInterpreter
> VMMaker-oscog.35]').

So it's SimpleStackBasedCogit. If you use StackToRegisterMappingCogit 
you'll get much better results.

>
>
>> - You used a CogVM (JIT) with Pharo but SqueakVM (interpreter) with Squeak
>> 4.2. What's even worse is that you based your conclusion on this mistake.
>>
>
> Yes, it is true. Daniel Galdames also pointed this out last night on the
> blog. But as I told before, it is just the benchmarks you get from the
> "download the latest version available" approach. I couldn't find a
> Cog-based Squeak on its ftp site, (perhaps I was too lazy). I won't have the
> time to repeat this until next week, then I'll try this.

It's a question of how much time you spend on it. You used Pharo 1.2, 
though you have to dig deep to download it from the Pharo website. Finding 
Pharo 1.1.1 is obvious from there :).
Anyway it doesn't really matter which image you use for #tinyBenchmarks, 
because it's a VM benchmark. The image can hardly affect it's results.

>
>
>> - Does #tinyBenchmarks alone give fair performance comparison? Hardly.
>>
>> Well, it was the benchmark I knew of. Do you know a better performance
> benchmark available? If so, I could retry the experiment.

See what Eliot suggested.


Levente

>
>
>>
>> Levente
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thx
>>> T.
>>> --
>>> NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen!
>>> Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Felipe Ba?ados Schwerter
> Estudiante de Ingeniería Civil en Computación
> http://www.dcc.uchile.cl/~fbanados
> Universidad de Chile
>


More information about the Pharo-project mailing list