Joachim Breitner <[email protected]> writes: > Hi, > > this is mostly a rant, targeted at the very vague fact that runtime > performance benchmarks are so damn hard. > > This commit just came in: > https://git.haskell.org/ghc.git/commitdiff/56c9bb39246f9ffd8ed41a0656bfe8e60d23be57 > Clearly, only parts of the profiling RTS have changed. > > This is what perf.haskell.org measures: > https://perf.haskell.org/ghc/#revision/56c9bb39246f9ffd8ed41a0656bfe8e60d23be57 > Highlights: > nofib/time/cryptarithm1 0.502 + 9.36% > 0.549 seconds > nofib/time/fasta 0.406 + 4.43% > 0.424 seconds > These changes are permanent, i.e. the following commits consistently > give the higher runtimes. > > But nofib does not even run the profiling RTS! > > *very audible sigh* > > (Conclusion: Ignore runtime changes in nofib when the RTS has changed, > the results are simply unusable.) > > I also wonder if we can adjust the input and parameters to nofib (in a > new “veryslow” setting) to get them all run in a few seconds on modern > hardware, instead of subseconds.
I think this would be a very worthwhile effort. Sub-second runtimes really are just plain useless. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
