[ruby-core:67664] [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] [Open] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[ruby-core:67664] [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] [Open] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[ismaelga]

Issue #10754 has been reported by Ismael Abreu.

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:67665] Re: [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] [Open] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[Eric Wong]

This speedup probably happens because Hash#[] has an optimized dispatch
VM instruction (opt_aref in insns.def) while Hash#include? does not.

Seems like an OK change to make, I'll commit in a few days unless others
raise objections.

[ruby-core:67667] [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[normalperson]

Issue #10754 has been updated by Eric Wong.


 This speedup probably happens because Hash#[] has an optimized dispatch
 VM instruction (opt_aref in insns.def) while Hash#include? does not.
 
 Seems like an OK change to make, I'll commit in a few days unless others
 raise objections.

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754#change-51082

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:67709] [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[ismaelga]

Issue #10754 has been updated by Ismael Abreu.


With the benchmarks I've run I noticed that ~~sometimes~~ rarely, the old include? was faster.
Do you have any idea why is that? The only cause I can think of is the GC.

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754#change-51141

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:67768] Re: [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[Eric Wong]

I didn't notice the old code being faster, and I don't see your
benchmark triggering GC.  Perhaps it is related to memory size
(swapping or CPU cache misses) or power management
(CPU clock frequency adjustment, "turbo boost", etc...)
Modern hardware is tricky to benchmark :/

[ruby-core:67769] [ruby-trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[normalperson]

Issue #10754 has been updated by Eric Wong.


 I didn't notice the old code being faster, and I don't see your
 benchmark triggering GC.  Perhaps it is related to memory size
 (swapping or CPU cache misses) or power management
 (CPU clock frequency adjustment, "turbo boost", etc...)
 Modern hardware is tricky to benchmark :/

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754#change-51193

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:68088] [Ruby trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[ismaelga]

Issue #10754 has been updated by Ismael Abreu.


Any update on this?

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754#change-51470

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:68090] Re: [Ruby trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[Eric Wong]

Thanks for the reminder, I got distracted with other stuff :x
Committed r49568

[ruby-core:68094] [Ruby trunk - Misc #10754] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[ismaelga]

Issue #10754 has been updated by Ismael Abreu.


Awesome! :)

Shouldn't this issue be closed also?

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754#change-51473

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:68097] [Ruby trunk - Misc #10754] [Closed] Tiny optimisation of Set#include?

[ruby-core]

Issue #10754 has been updated by Marc-Andre Lafortune.

Status changed from Open to Closed

----------------------------------------
Misc #10754: Tiny optimisation of Set#include?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10754#change-51476

* Author: Ismael Abreu
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi!

I'm not sure if this a relevant optimisation but here it goes. A simple way to improve Set#include?
I don't think there should be any side effects with this change.

Here are some dummy benchmarks https://gist.github.com/ismaelga/68bb3ea51b4742f65699
They are not consistent, but that should be because of garbage collection or something. Right?

I've also sent a Pull Request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/810

---Files--------------------------------
patch.diff (544 Bytes)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/