Hi all,
On 07 Feb 2013, at 10:44, Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 06/02/13 22:26, Andy Georges wrote:
>> Quantifying performance changes with effect size confidence intervals -
>> Tomas Kalibera and Richard Jones, 2012 (tech report)
>
> This is a good one - it was actually a talk by Richard Jones tha
On 06/02/13 22:26, Andy Georges wrote:
Quantifying performance changes with effect size confidence intervals - Tomas
Kalibera and Richard Jones, 2012 (tech report)
This is a good one - it was actually a talk by Richard Jones that
highlighted to me the problems with averaging over benchmarks (
Hi Johan,
On 06 Feb 2013, at 17:04, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
> This is slightly off topic, but I wanted to plant this thought in people's
> brains: we shouldn't place much significance in the average of a bunch of
> benchmarks (even the geometr
On 06/02/13 16:04, Johan Tibell wrote:
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Simon Marlow mailto:marlo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
This is slightly off topic, but I wanted to plant this thought in
people's brains: we shouldn't place much significance in the average
of a bunch of benchmarks (even
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
> This is slightly off topic, but I wanted to plant this thought in people's
> brains: we shouldn't place much significance in the average of a bunch of
> benchmarks (even the geometric mean), because it assumes that the
> benchmarks have a sens
On 05/02/13 23:48, Johan Tibell wrote:
I've now added the shootout programs that could be added without
modifying the programs itself. I described why some programs weren't
added in nofib/shootout/README.
For the curious, here's the change in these benchmarks from 7.0.4 to 7.6.2:
--
d Terei
Cc: Simon Peyton-Jones; Nicolas Frisby; ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: Re: nofib comparisons between 7.0.4, 7.4.2, 7.6.1, and 7.6.2
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:19 AM, David Terei
mailto:davidte...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 5 February 2013 02:13, Simon Peyton-Jones
mailto:simo...@microsoft.
I've now added the shootout programs that could be added without modifying
the programs itself. I described why some programs weren't added in
nofib/shootout/README.
For the curious, here's the change in these benchmarks from 7.0.4 to 7.6.2:
---
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:11 PM, David Terei wrote:
> Why are you creating new shootout benchmarks though rather than simply
> move the exiting Shootout folder from fibon/Shootout to the top level
> and fixing the makefile?
>
I discussed this with David offline. The summary is that the shootout
b
On 5 February 2013 09:34, Johan Tibell wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:19 AM, David Terei wrote:
>>
>> On 5 February 2013 02:13, Simon Peyton-Jones
>> wrote:
>> > I believe fibon/ was helpfully added by someone, but never integrated
>> > into
>> > the nofib build system. Just needs doing, I t
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:19 AM, David Terei wrote:
> On 5 February 2013 02:13, Simon Peyton-Jones
> wrote:
> > I believe fibon/ was helpfully added by someone, but never integrated
> into
> > the nofib build system. Just needs doing, I think
>
> No I spent a fair amount of effort fixing this up
n
>
> | -Original Message-
> | From: ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org]
> | On Behalf Of Austin Seipp
> | Sent: 05 February 2013 04:22
> | To: Johan Tibell
> | Cc: ghc-devs@haskell.org
> | Subject: Re: nofib comparisons between 7.0.4, 7.4.
We have some benchmarks for Cloud Haskell and its underlying network-transport
infrastructure that I'm in the process of trying to automate. I'd be very
interested to see how these fare against various GHC releases, though I suspect
we'll have to tweak the dependencies considerably in order to make
I'd like to investigate the "other regressions out there".
Do you have more info? Perhaps a list? Maybe even benchmarking code?
Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:22 AM, Austin Seipp wrote:
> I'm +1 for this. Eyal Lotem and I were just discussing this on IRC a
> few minutes ago, and he suffered
;
> To: Johan Tibell
> Cc: ghc-devs@haskell.org
> Subject: Re: nofib comparisons between 7.0.4, 7.4.2, 7.6.1, and 7.6.2
>
>
>
> Is anyone familiar with the "fibon" directory within the nofib.git
> repository?
>
>
>
> http://darcs.haskell.org/nofib/fibon/
>
>
On 5 February 2013 01:24, Nicolas Frisby wrote:
> Is anyone familiar with the "fibon" directory within the nofib.git
> repository?
>
> http://darcs.haskell.org/nofib/fibon/
Yes. They are from here: https://github.com/dmpots/fibon
Fibon is a newer, alternative benchmarking suite for Haskell done
t:* Re: nofib comparisons between 7.0.4, 7.4.2, 7.6.1, and 7.6.2
Is anyone familiar with the "fibon" directory within the nofib.git
repository?
http://darcs.haskell.org/nofib/fibon/
Johan, this at least seems like an potential home for the additional
programs you suggested adding. In par
@haskell.org
Subject: Re: nofib comparisons between 7.0.4, 7.4.2, 7.6.1, and 7.6.2
Is anyone familiar with the "fibon" directory within the nofib.git repository?
http://darcs.haskell.org/nofib/fibon/
Johan, this at least seems like an potential home for the additional programs
you sugges
Is anyone familiar with the "fibon" directory within the nofib.git
repository?
http://darcs.haskell.org/nofib/fibon/
Johan, this at least seems like an potential home for the additional
programs you suggested adding. In particular, it has Repa, Dph, Shootout,
and Hackage subdirectories.
I'm doin
...@haskell.org]
| On Behalf Of Austin Seipp
| Sent: 05 February 2013 04:22
| To: Johan Tibell
| Cc: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: nofib comparisons between 7.0.4, 7.4.2, 7.6.1, and 7.6.2
|
| I'm +1 for this. Eyal Lotem and I were just discussing this on IRC a few
| minutes ago, and he suf
I'm +1 for this. Eyal Lotem and I were just discussing this on IRC a
few minutes ago, and he suffered a rather large (~25%) performance hit
when upgrading to 7.6.1, which is unfortunate.
Committers are typically very good about recording nofib results in
their commit and being performance-courteou
21 matches
Mail list logo
