[Pharo-project] new Cog VMs uploaded

Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda at gmail.com
Tue May 3 19:51:06 CEST 2011


On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 4:38 AM, Philippe Marschall <kustos at gmx.net> wrote:

> On 29.04.2011 19:03, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Philippe Marschall <kustos at gmx.net
> > <mailto:kustos at gmx.net>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 27.04.2011 19 <tel:27.04.2011%2019>:23, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> >     > Philippe,
> >     >
> >     >     can you please profile before and after?  This could very well
> >     be to
> >     > do with the additional cost of shallowCopy for contexts, but it is
> >     > inevitable that a correct implementation is going to be more
> expensive
> >     > than the simple block-copy.  The new implementation can be
> optimized,
> >     > but we need to profile first to be sure we're tilting at the
> relevant
> >     > windmill.
> >
> >
> >     What kind of profiling do you have in mind, MessageTally?
> >
> >
> > Yes, that would be fine.  Thanks!
>
> OK, there you go. As you'll see the runtime is about the same, that's
> because we do more iterations in the same time. Also note the time we're
> spending in WriteStream >> #nextPutAll: with interestingly has a
> different growing behavior than WriteStream >> #nextPut: (only 25% vs
> 100%). I already raised the issue once but people argued that the
> current code is prefect.
>

Hmmm.  GC behaviour is very different.  Also requestContext Also shows up in
the 2382 profiles but not the 2370 traces.  You'll need to dig a little
deeper to account for these differences.  I guess they could well be to do
with the new (correct) MethodContext copying behaviour retaining more state
and hence stressing the GC more.



>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/attachments/20110503/a0d07798/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pharo-project mailing list