From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,3a6a9f1d654285ba X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!e27g2000yqm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: jonathan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Shootout program for K-Nucleotide (patches) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <4960e428-6705-431a-a594-9e188b7388a1@e27g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> References: <4a743343$0$32674$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <4bc4b12d-40f8-4140-8ef6-326d9e6b8adf@k30g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> <4a897b61$0$30221$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <4d48b846-bb2d-4126-86c2-487b2244c9ad@d4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <4a8c119d$0$31866$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <9b7557ca-df60-4d70-b692-f077b71983eb@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <6f1c440c-9941-4aa7-a4cd-bf02a00db49a@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com> <4a8c8fc8$0$32678$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.117.23.126 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1250798124 26201 127.0.0.1 (20 Aug 2009 19:55:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:55:24 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: e27g2000yqm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=143.117.23.126; posting-account=Jzt5lQoAAAB4PhTgRLOPGuTLd_K1LY-C User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.12) Gecko/2009072220 Iceweasel/3.0.6 (Debian-3.0.6-1),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7917 Date: 2009-08-20T12:55:24-07:00 List-Id: Now that I've measured IO overheard, I can say more about the efficiency of the multitasking knuckeotide. The optimal result would be about 11 sec on 4 cores. The best I measure is about 13.2 seconds - hard to improve on. Here is the best timing I get on 4 cores. (I put in the optimization I described previously; results are a bit improved over yesterday. The actual times fluctuate wildly. This is the lower bound.) real 0m13.174s user 0m32.294s sys 0m0.420s 3.7 sec go to IO, which won't parallelize. Those 3.7 sec can't be reduced by adding more tasks. The remaining 28.6 sec we hope to see reduced to 28.6 / 4 = 7.15 sec on 4 cores in the perfect limit. That means the best result we can hope for is a running time of 3.7 + 7.15 = 10.85 sec. Jonathan