Here are my results.
The transient version performs slightly better on windows 32bit client
JVM, and considerably better on linux 64bit server JVM (they are both
1.06.0_17)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send e
> (i love how supposedly we've come so far with our systems, only to
> have them become overly complex. it is to sigh. on the other hand i
> guess it is 'job security'.)
Heh, true. Reading articles about JVM tuning reminds me what the "M"
stands for -- it's as complicated a topic as optimizing t
> Most likely it's related to the JVM version (1.5 by default), the
> amount of memory allocated (I use -Xmx512m), the amount of L2 cache, a
> HotSpot tuning parameter, or something else along those lines.
>
> There are far too many possibilities to consider, and too little
> evidence, to support a
> I believe that this is most likely a symptom of the Apple JVM and not
> that of transients as the change from persistents to transients is
> far more substantial
> on one of our linux servers than it is on my macbook pro (6x vs 2x
> speedup)
Not necessarily so. My times earlier in this threa
> I believe that this is most likely a symptom of the Apple JVM and not
yeah, given Apple's wonderful treatment of Java over the years, i
could believe your theory.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to
I believe that this is most likely a symptom of the Apple JVM and not
that of transients
as the change from persistents to transients is far more substantial
on one of our linux
servers than it is on my macbook pro (6x vs 2x speedup)
I'm not entirely sure as to why this is the case but I suspect t
i have tried:
1.5
1.6
1.6 -server
the last i did both in repl-in-emacs, and in a repl-in-straightup-shell.
the numbers i get are weird. it does seem like v2 is faster than v,
but never gets stupendously fast (never faster than 500 msec on a dual
core macbook pro 2.2ghz core 2 duo 4gb ram), and v
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:45:46AM -0500, John Harrop wrote:
>Nothing so serious as a hang, though, and at least I can do basic things in
>my IDE without reaching for the frelling manual every two minutes to look up
>some key-combination :)
I suspect both models are going to be important. I feel
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 6:05 AM, Michael Wood wrote:
> > You've got some kind of system problem confounding your results, I'll
> bet.
> > It got slower? One test actually hung?
> > My suspicion, of course, lies with the emacs environment you've just
> > confessed to using. Half the traffic on thi
2009/11/21 John Harrop :
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Raoul Duke wrote:
>>
>> > Try with a 1.6 JVM...
>>
>> wow. it actually got worse than when i was using 1.5. ... so much for
>> hallowed write-once-run-the-same-anywhere-ish of the jvm, d'oh.
>>
>> Clojure 1.1.0-alpha-SNAPSHOT
>> user=> (l
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Raoul Duke wrote:
> > Try with a 1.6 JVM...
>
> wow. it actually got worse than when i was using 1.5. ... so much for
> hallowed write-once-run-the-same-anywhere-ish of the jvm, d'oh.
>
> Clojure 1.1.0-alpha-SNAPSHOT
> user=> (load-file "/tmp/test.clj")
> #'user/v
> user=> (time (def v (vrange 100)))
> --- never came back, i had to ^C^C (in emacs buffer)!!
p.s. so at least the transient version never did that ;-)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@g
> Try with a 1.6 JVM...
wow. it actually got worse than when i was using 1.5. ... so much for
hallowed write-once-run-the-same-anywhere-ish of the jvm, d'oh.
Clojure 1.1.0-alpha-SNAPSHOT
user=> (load-file "/tmp/test.clj")
#'user/vrange2
user=> (. System getProperty "java.version")
"1.6.0_15"
user
> clojure-1.1.0-alpha-SNAPSHOT.jar for this. is there something about
> having to have the jit warm up or something over a zillion runs?
I see an immediate speed improvement from transients with a recent
Clojure, and after a few runs the difference is obvious.
user=> (time (def v (vrange 10
I have seen perf consistent with the documentation when using Java 6
and server vm.
Stu
> hm.
>
> i copied and pasted the examples from the transient page into a local
> test.clj, and i don't really see a significant performance difference
> (it should be an order of magnitude according to the
hm.
i copied and pasted the examples from the transient page into a local
test.clj, and i don't really see a significant performance difference
(it should be an order of magnitude according to the web page).
macbook pro. just downloaded sources and built
clojure-1.1.0-alpha-SNAPSHOT.jar for this.
16 matches
Mail list logo
