On Apr 28, 2013, at 12:34 AM, Timothy Baldridge wrote: > E-mail thread had less to do with issues of Clojure per se, but more with > issues the JVM had running on a 48-way machine. Or am I missing something? > > IIRC the Azul people played with Clojure a bit, I wonder if their suped-up > JVM allows Clojure to perform any better.
Whatever the root cause (and I'm not sure that that has been fully clarified), the bottom line is that Clojure users may not be able to get reasonable speedups from using large-core-count machines, even on problems that would seem to be well suited to it (large grain, fully independent tasks), and even when using the best methods for launching the tasks that anyone in the community can suggest. -Lee -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
