On 4 Jun 2015, at 15:28, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Jun 4, 2015, at 4:09 PM, Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com> wrote: >> On 4 Jun 2015, at 13:37, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >>> ... >>> If you wanna go the extra mile it's useful for the data provider to supply >>> a string description argument summarizing the test data. >> >> Added. >> > > I did not mean: > >> + @DataProvider(name = "intSet") > > I meant as a String parameter of the test method, so that some useful summary > shows up in the test report. It's not terribly important. D’oh! Sorry. >>> You might want to size the arrays in proportion to the parallelism since >>> the threshold is calculated as: >>> >>> this.threshold = >>> (p = (hi - lo) / (ForkJoinPool.getCommonPoolParallelism() << 3)) >>> <= MIN_PARTITION ? MIN_PARTITION : p; >>> >>> So for a large machine with say a parallelism of 2^5 an array size of 2^12 >>> is not sufficient to go above MIN_PARTITION.. >> >> I could be wrong, and I accept your point about sizing as per parallelism, >> but I think 2^12 should be sufficient for most systems, given MIN_PARTITION >> = 16. With a parallelism of 2^5, then p will be greater than MIN_PARTITION, >> no? >> > > Equal to: > > 2^12 / (2^5 * 2^3) = 2^12 / 2^8 = 2^4 Another d’oh! I missed the '<< 3' in my calculations. > I think it would be ok to increase this to 2^14. Increasing the size to 2^14 increases the execution time of the test from ~2 secs to ~(12-16) secs on my really old slow machine. So this should be ok. I’ll run some more tests with the increased size before pushing. Thanks, -Chris. > Paul.
