Good idea. Results are... desktop: 664 503 569 bytecodes/sec; 837 14 077 sends/sec. Linux in VM on desktop: 716 083 916 bytecodes/sec; 74 030 622 sends/sec notebook: 1 114 861 186 bytecodes/sec; 148 958 012 sends/sec ...results fluctuate by about 10 % on all systems when tried multiple times with some pauses between.
It is right that notebook is almost two times faster (but not 10 times like with compilation), because it has more recent processor (Core i5 mobile vs Athlon 64 x2). Jan Clément Bera-4 wrote > What about "1 tinyBenchmarks" ? > > Just to know if the VM is slower as a whole or only compilation / source > access ? > > 2015-06-30 0:36 GMT+02:00 Jan Blizničenko < > bliznjan@.cvut > >: > >> And one another benchmark of linux in VM on that desktop PC: >> Roassal loading - 58 s >> compilations per second - avg: 262.4682, min: 257.194, max: 289.684 >> ...so the desktop PC is capable of better result and problem is somewhere >> in >> Windows, which I was afraid of... >> >> I'd also like to add to previous Windows tests that with antivirus turned >> on >> everything takes more time approximately by half of original time. >> >> Jan >> >> >> Jan Blizničenko wrote >> > Desktop: 386 s. >> > Notebook: 48 s. >> > Linux in VM on notebook: 27 s. >> > >> > >> > Notebook: compilations per second - avg: 217.7153, min: 5.0, max: >> 247.258 >> > Desktop: compilations per second - avg: 23.1337, min: 19.448, max: >> 28.155 >> > Linux in VM on notebook: compilations per second - avg: >> 529.0066600000001, >> > min: 5.0, max: 573.97 >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Slow-compilation-on-one-of-my-Windows-PCs-tp4834668p4834713.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Slow-compilation-on-one-of-my-Windows-PCs-tp4834668p4834738.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
