ruby-core@ruby-lang.org archive (unofficial mirror)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
Subject: [ruby-core:37824] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Assigned] come back gem_prelude!
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 18:48:58 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHGf_=oOkSY7zOjPMqsf9Fq0-fDRZQ8dJHzFkNMrwMEQXN1eqA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <redmine.journal-18863.20110706131344@ruby-lang.org>

Hi

Nice improvement!

> Issue #4962 has been updated by Eric Hodel.
>
> Status changed from Open to Assigned
>
> I have made three runs of `make benchmark` using the following revisions of ruby:
>
> ruby 1.9.2p180 (2011-02-18 revision 30909) [x86_64-darwin10.8.0]
>
> ruby 1.9.3dev (2011-07-05 trunk 32413) [x86_64-darwin10.8.0]
>
> The benchmark bm_vm_thread_mutex3.rb was disabled as it presented an an extreme outlier for 1.9.2p180.

Ah, yes. This is the reason why I rewrote GVL. We should ignore it.


> I took the total time it took all benchmarks to run.
>
> The first run is with the ruby checkout
>
> 1.9.2:  204.890 206.312 209.319
> 1.9.3:  210.793 215.815 214.773
> diff:   5.903   9.503   5.454
>
> (For diff, smaller is better)
>
> The second run is with --disable-gems for 1.9.3.  I modified RUNRUBY in Makefile:
>
> RUNRUBY = $(MINIRUBY) $(srcdir)/tool/runruby.rb --extout=$(EXTOUT) $(RUNRUBYOPT) -- --disable-gems

I recommend to change $(MINIRUBY) to ./ruby if your 1.9.2 is not
miniruby. It help to avoid
see unrelated benchmark difference. :)


>
> 1.9.2:  215.472 206.452 205.110
> 1.9.3:  201.837 194.694 191.747
> diff:   -13.635 -11.758 -13.363
>
> The third run is with my changes to delay work in rubygems.rb:
>
> 1.9.2:  208.982 211.249 208.637
> 1.9.3:  198.714 201.984 198.293
> diff:   -10.268 -9.265  -10.344
>
> Here are the average differences from 1.9.2-p180:
>
> stock ruby trunk:       6.953
> --disable-gems: -12.919
> rubygems patches:       -9.959
>
> Is the slowdown of 2.96 seconds between --disable-gems and my fixes across all benchmarks acceptable?
>
> Should I look for additional improvements?

Great!

Can you please tell us a result of vm3_gc and io_file_read? They have
most big degressions
and I'm worry about it.

Anyway, personally I think it is acceptable and no more improvemnt
because usually people only
compare 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 and don't compare individual patches in 1.9.3 changes.

Endoh-san, What do you think?

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-06  9:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-02  5:18 [ruby-core:37730] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Open] come back gem_prelude! Yusuke Endoh
2011-07-02 14:13 ` [ruby-core:37741] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962] " Luis Lavena
2011-07-02 14:48   ` [ruby-core:37743] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-07-02 19:40 ` [ruby-core:37746] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Open] " Roger Pack
2011-07-05 21:56 ` [ruby-core:37813] " Aaron Patterson
2011-07-05 22:01   ` [ruby-core:37814] " Luis Lavena
2011-07-05 22:19     ` [ruby-core:37815] " Aaron Patterson
2011-07-10 23:50   ` [ruby-core:37975] " Nobuyoshi Nakada
2011-07-13  5:40     ` [ruby-core:38038] " Aaron Patterson
2011-07-05 23:46 ` [ruby-core:37818] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-06  0:16   ` [ruby-core:37819] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-07-06  2:06 ` [ruby-core:37820] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-06  4:14 ` [ruby-core:37821] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Assigned] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-06  9:48   ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2011-07-06 11:57     ` [ruby-core:37826] " Yusuke ENDOH
2011-07-06 18:20       ` [ruby-core:37830] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-06 18:20     ` [ruby-core:37829] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-06 21:21 ` [ruby-core:37833] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-06 22:02   ` [ruby-core:37834] " Benoit Daloze
2011-07-06 22:26     ` [ruby-core:37835] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-09  0:36 ` [ruby-core:37906] " Eric Hodel
2011-07-09  4:20 ` [ruby-core:37910] " Motohiro KOSAKI
2011-07-09  4:34 ` [ruby-core:37911] " Motohiro KOSAKI
2011-07-10 23:57 ` [ruby-core:37976] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Closed] " Motohiro KOSAKI

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/community/mailing-lists/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAHGf_=oOkSY7zOjPMqsf9Fq0-fDRZQ8dJHzFkNMrwMEQXN1eqA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=ruby-core@ruby-lang.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).