Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Re: Why OCaml sucks
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Jon Harrop <jon@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks
On Tuesday 13 May 2008 01:42:42 Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> Am Montag, den 12.05.2008, 14:22 +0100 schrieb Richard Jones:
> > This is just barely faster than Jon's OCaml version using message
> > passing (12% faster on my test machine[0]).  Which just seems to show
> > that the overhead of message passing _isn't_ the problem here[1].
>
> I've just written my own distributed version. You find my comments and
> timings here:
>
> http://blog.camlcity.org/blog/parallelmm.html
>
> The code is here:
>
> https://godirepo.camlcity.org/svn/lib-ocamlnet2/trunk/code/examples/rpc/mat
>rixmult/
>
> In this (very unoptimized) multiplier message passing accounts for ~25%
> of the runtime. Even for 2 cores there is already a speedup. 10 cores
> (over a network) are about 4 times faster than a single core without
> message passing.

For what values of "n"?

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e