Stan, I am convinced of that! The overall speed difference between SimPy in IP and SimPy in CPython is much larger than the published IP-vs-CPython benchmarks suggest. I sincerely hope that in a next round of IP tuning, the implementation of "yield" is reviewed and optimized for speed. It is an important construct.
Klaus > -----Original Message----- > From: Stanislas Pinte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 9:51 AM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Cc: Klaus Muller; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > 'Simpy-Developer List' > Subject: Re: [IronPython] [Simpy-users] RE: SimPy on > IronPython timing test > > > Dino, Klaus, > > just a small question: Could it be the coroutines (yield > statement) implementation in C# that would slow down the > simpy simulation? > > Thanks, > > Stan. > > Dino Viehland a écrit : > > Klaus, > > > > You're correct in that we didn't do a whole lot of > performance tuning from the betas to RC. Jim did a little > bit of work based upon some small repros that were easy to > pick apart. For the most part though everyone else was > focused on fixing various incompatabilities. Now that we're > at 1.0 RC we'll only be fixing major bugs that are blocking issues. > > > > Hopefully in the future we'll have an opportunity > to drill into this. Also if you see any hot spots that can > be isolated into simple repros then it'd be much easier for > us to look at those issues rather than all of SimPy. > > > > Thanks for see keeping the numbers coming - it's > good to see we've improved a small amount, hopefully we can > improve a lot more in the future. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Klaus Muller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 4:14 AM > > To: Dino Viehland; 'Discussion of IronPython'; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Simpy-Developer List' > > Subject: FW: [Simpy-users] RE: [IronPython] SimPy on > IronPython timing > > test > > > > Dino, > > I was happy to see the announcement of the IronPython 1.0 > Release Candidate. > > I downloaded and ran the same test as indicated in my message of > > February 14, i.e. > > > > from SimPy.Simulation import * > > import time > > > > class Dum(Process): > > def run(self): > > yield hold,self,3 > > initialize() > > nrProcs=int(raw_input("Nr of processes?")) > > processes=[Dum("Dum%s"%x) for x in range(1,nrProcs)] > > > > for i in range(nrProcs): > > p=Dum("%s"%i) > > activate(p,p.run(),at=i) > > > > tStart=(time.clock(),time.time()) > > simulate(until=2*nrProcs) > > print "Ran in %s seconds for %s > > processes"%((time.clock()-tStart[0],time.time()-tStart[1]),nrProcs) > > raw_input("Hit any key . . .") > > > > Here are the results: > > > > Nr processes=10000 > > ------------------ > > IronPython RC: 1.82 seconds (Beta 2: 2.06 seconds) Cpython > 2.3: 0.47 > > seconds > > > > Nr processes=50000 > > ------------------ > > IronPython rc: 14.19 seconds (Beta 2: 15.53 seconds) > Cpython 2.3: 3.67 > > seconds > > > > So, the RC's runtime performance is slightly better than > that of Beta > > 2, but there is still a significant speed advantage for CPython. > > > > I have the impression that not much has been done on IronPython > > performance tuning. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Klaus Müller > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Klaus > > Muller > > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:30 PM > > To: 'Dino Viehland'; 'Discussion of IronPython'; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Simpy-Developer List' > > Subject: RE: [Simpy-users] RE: [IronPython] SimPy on > IronPython timing > > test > > > > Dino, > > Fully understood! IronPython looks good for such an early version! > > > > I am looking forward to future releases of IronPython for > performance, > > but continue trying the beta out with SimPy in the meantime. > > > > Klaus Müller > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dino > >> Viehland > >> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 6:01 PM > >> To: Discussion of IronPython; > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Simpy-Developer List' > >> Subject: [Simpy-users] RE: [IronPython] SimPy on IronPython timing > >> test > >> > >> Thanks for the report Klaus. Currently we're mostly focused on > >> correctness but later in the beta cycle we're going to > come back and > >> target perf pretty heavily. I've gone ahead and filed this in our > >> bug database so we won't miss it when we get to that point. > >> > >> > >> Do you want to help develop Dynamic languages on CLR? > >> (http://members.microsoft.com/careers/search/details.aspx?JobI > >> D=6D4754DE-11F0-45DF-8B78-DC1B43134038) > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Klaus Muller > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 10:57 PM > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Simpy-Developer List' > >> Cc: [email protected] > >> Subject: [IronPython] SimPy on IronPython timing test > >> > >> All: > >> I have run a first simple benchmark to compare SimPy under > IronPython > >> with SimPy under CPython. I ran the following program: > >> > >> from SimPy.Simulation import * > >> import time > >> > >> class Dum(Process): > >> def run(self): > >> yield hold,self,3 > >> initialize() > >> nrProcs=int(raw_input("Nr of processes?")) > >> processes=[Dum("Dum%s"%x) for x in range(1,nrProcs)] > >> > >> for i in range(nrProcs): > >> p=Dum("%s"%i) > >> activate(p,p.run(),at=i) > >> > >> tStart=(time.clock(),time.time()) > >> simulate(until=2*nrProcs) > >> print "Ran in %s seconds for %s > >> processes"%((time.clock()-tStart[0],time.time()-tStart[1]),nrProcs) > >> raw_input("Hit any key . . .") > >> > >> Here are the results: > >> > >> Nr processes=10000 > >> ------------------ > >> IronPython: 2.06 seconds > >> CPython: 0.5 seconds > >> > >> Nr processes=50000 > >> ------------------ > >> IronPython: 15.53 seconds > >> CPython: 3.67 seconds > >> > >> At this moment, IronPython is clearly way slower than > CPython on this > >> benchmark. > >> > >> Clearly, it is early days for IronPython (this was run under beta > >> release 2) and its developers will surely still optimize its > >> performance a lot. > >> > >> If Microsoft actually support IronPython, this will be an > important > >> SimPy platform in the future and we will have to watch its further > >> development. > >> > >> Klaus Müller > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------- > >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through > >> log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX > search engine > >> that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. > >> DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! > >> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd___________________________ > >> ____________________ > >> Simpy-users mailing list > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simpy-users > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > > > > > > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Stanislas Pinte e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ERTMS Solutions http://www.ertmssolutions.com > Rue de l'Autonomie, 1 Tel: + 322 - 522.06.63 > 1070 Bruxelles Fax: + 322 - 522.09.30 > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Skype (http://www.skype.com) id: stanpinte > ----------------------------------------------------------------- >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
