[erlang-questions] widefinder update

[Steve Vinoski]

On 10/24/07, Thomas Lindgren <thomasl_erlang@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>
> --- Steve Vinoski <vinoski@REDACTED> wrote:
>
> Anders, thanks for collecting and posting these.
> > I've just performed a set
> > of new timings for all of them, as listed below. For
> > each, I just ran this
> > command:
> >
> > time erl -smp -noshell -run <test_case> main
> > o1000k.ap >/dev/null
> >
> > where "<test_case>" is the name of the tbray test
> > case file. All were
> > looped ten times, and I took the best timing for
> > each. All tests were done
> > on my 8-core 2.33 GHz dual Intel Xeon with 2 GB RAM
> > Linux box, in a local
> > (non-NFS) directory.
>
> So, looking at Steve's results on his 8-core system,
> we have:
>
>             real    user     tbray5/real    user/real
> tbray5      9.8     --       1.0            --
> tbray14     6.63    34.53    1.48           5.21
> tbray15     4.12    25.14    2.38           6.10
> tbray16     3.16    16.15    3.10           5.11
> tbray_tuple 2.28     8.61    4.30           3.78
> tbray_ets   1.87     7.42    5.24           3.97
> tbray_blkr  1.55     7.34    6.32           4.74
>
> tbray5/real is the speedup versus the baseline, while
> user/real is the speedup for each version due to
> parallelization.
>
> Thus, the latest version is 6.3 times faster than the
> first one. The parallel speedup is about the same in
> tbray5 and tbray_blkr, a very decent utilization of
> >50%, but the amount of work (user) has shrunk from
> (presumably more than) 34.53 seconds to 7.34 seconds.
>
> Tim Bray's original Erlang number on "his macbook"
> appears to be 34.16 seconds user (probably about the
> same real?). How does this compare to Ruby? Tim Bray
> reported that it needed 3.46 seconds real, again on
> his macbook. (As I understand it, all results here are
> for the big data set.)
>

Yes, all results are for o1000k.ap, Tim's original large dataset. As for
Ruby, I just ran Tim's original code on the 8-core, and out of ten attempts
the best was:

real    0m2.210s
user    0m2.095s
sys     0m0.109s

--steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20071024/0ab0ca83/attachment.htm>