Re: Is it a bad sign...
- From: rpw3@xxxxxxxx (Rob Warnock)
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:05:02 -0500
Kenny <kentilton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+---------------
| ....when apropos takes a minute to search for matches?
|
| And speaking of minutes, it has been quite a few waiting for loop to
| count all the symbols. I wonder why it is so slow, doing maybe
| 1.5m/minute.
+---------------
Hmmm... I only have a ~20K symbols lying around,
but it can count them pretty fast, ~29 Msymbol/s
[I did it 1000 times to get a reliable result]:
cmu> (time
(let ((count 0))
(dotimes (i 1000)
(do-all-symbols (ignore)
(declare (ignorable ignore))
(incf count)))
count))
; Compiling LAMBDA NIL:
; Compiling Top-Level Form:
; Evaluation took:
; 0.76f0 seconds of real time
; 0.747812f0 seconds of user run time
; 0.0f0 seconds of system run time
; 1,420,375,501 CPU cycles
; 0 page faults and
; 368,008 bytes consed.
;
22453000
cmu> (/ 22453000 0.76f0)
2.9543422e7
cmu>
How are you counting them? I know about DO-ALL-SYMBOLS (above),
but I don't know any way to use LOOP to count symbols in more
than one package at a time...
+---------------
| And what the hell does apropos know that loop does not
| about zooming through all the symbols?
+---------------
Hmmm... Let's see here... Well, in CMUCL, APROPOS loops over
(LIST-ALL-PACKAGES) and does a DO-SYMBOLS to iterate over each
package. Should be slower than the above, I'm guessing. Also,
we're gonna get a *bunch* of duplications, since several packages
(USE :CL) [though that really shouldn't affect the *rate*].
cmu> (time
(let ((count 0))
(dotimes (i 1000)
(dolist (p (list-all-packages))
(do-symbols (ignore p)
(declare (ignorable ignore))
(incf count))))
count))
; Compiling LAMBDA NIL:
; Compiling Top-Level Form:
; Evaluation took:
; 23.66f0 seconds of real time
; 23.278011f0 seconds of user run time
; 1.6f-5 seconds of system run time
; 43,886,881,567 CPU cycles
; 0 page faults and
; 368,008 bytes consed.
;
87208000
cmu> (/ 87208000 23.66f0)
3685883.3
cmu>
Whoa! That's a *lot* slower! And if done with LOOP:
cmu> (time
(let ((count 0))
(dotimes (i 10)
(dolist (p (list-all-packages))
(loop for sym being the symbols in p do (incf count))))
count))
; Compiling LAMBDA NIL:
; Compiling Top-Level Form:
; Evaluation took:
; 2.55 seconds of real time
; 2.474624 seconds of user run time
; 0.007834 seconds of system run time
; 4,723,603,806 CPU cycles
; [Run times include 0.14 seconds GC run time]
; 0 page faults and
; 15,292,712 bytes consed.
;
859200
cmu> (/ 859200 2.55)
336941.2
cmu>
(*Ouch!*) More than 10 *times* slower!
+---------------
| And where should I put my money in my next computer?
| Is AMD any different than Intel, or shouls I save $150?
+---------------
I tend to like AMD. The above was done with a 1.855 GHz Athlon.
+---------------
| I know Vista is stupid, but is it slow?
+---------------
Dunno. The above was done on FreeBSD. ;-} ;-}
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <rpw3@xxxxxxxx>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
.
- References:
- Is it a bad sign...
- From: Kenny
- Is it a bad sign...
- Prev by Date: Re: use-package & name conflict: why they are not deferred?
- Next by Date: Re: Growing a data type?
- Previous by thread: Re: Is it a bad sign...
- Next by thread: Re: Is it a bad sign...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
