Heya Ludo, On Tue 24 Apr 2012 18:31, [email protected] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andy Wingo <[email protected]> skribis: > >> I spent some time poking at vlists and ended up squeezing out a little >> bit of performance. > > Any figures? Well, last time I checked, with the patch compiling peval.scm was 2.10 seconds, compared to 2.35 without. Not tiny, not huge. > Did you try fiddling with ‘block-growth-factor’, as suggested earlier? No I did not. Another thing one could fiddle with would be the block size for a new list head. I feel like we need more metrics though: a distribution of sizes of blocks, numbers of blocks in a vlist, hash collisions per block, etc. I'll merge this to master soon and we can check what impact the new hash function has on performance. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
