2005/10/19, Donald Bruce Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > kr.angelov: > > Hello Guys, > > > > I tried my own version of PackedStrings and the results are very nice. > > It is entirely based on ByteArray# and Int#. I have made two tests: > > > > Elapsed time > > | | FastPackedString | PackedString | > > +-----+------------------+--------------+ > > |test1| 99.26s | 3.81s | > > |test2| 175.88s | 5.28s | > > > > Maximum Memory Residency > > | | FastPackedString | PackedString | > > +-----+------------------+--------------+ > > |test1| 40.60Mb | 36.25Mb | > > |test2| 91.58Mb | 33.94Mb | > > Wow. Now this is really surprising. > > Firstly, I would point out that only testing pack and concat may be > slightly unrepresentative :)
Of course the representative benchmark needs more test cases. > However, on my machine: > > OpenBSD/Pentium-M 1.6G/ghc-6.5 -O > Elapsed time: FPS Simon's PackedString Krasimir's > test1 1.966s (40M) 2.151s (36M) 2.235s (36M) > test2 6.048s (24M) 3.160s (73M) 2.318s (39M) > > Which is basically what I expected. Though perhaps I need to improve > concat (we currently do things a little strangely in concat, due to the > darcs legacy), but pack itself is nice and fast. > > Linux/Pentium 4 3.6G/ghc-6.4.1 -O > test1 35.37s 30.97s 2.180s > test2 90.93s 60.55s 1.916s > > Ah!! So what's going on on Linux, I wonder. Could it be something about > 6.4.1? Are we seeing the difference between ForeignPtrs from 6.4 to 6.5? > I will investigate. I wonder why the test results are so different. I made my benchmark on WinXP on Celeron 3GHz with GHC from CVS HEAD. Cheers, Krasimir _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
