On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 01:28:54PM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > On 28/11/12 12:48, Ian Lynagh wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 09:20:57AM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > >> > >>My personal opinion is that we should switch to dynamic-by-default > >>on all x86_64 platforms, and OS X x86.
I should have deleted the above sentence. > >>The performance penalty for > >>x86/Linux is too high (30%), > > > >FWIW, if they're able to move from x86 static to x86_64 dynamic then > >there's only a ~15% difference overall: > > > >Run Time > >-1 s.d. ----- -18.7% > >+1 s.d. ----- +60.5% > >Average ----- +14.2% > > > >Mutator Time > >-1 s.d. ----- -29.0% > >+1 s.d. ----- +33.7% > >Average ----- -2.6% > > > >GC Time > >-1 s.d. ----- +22.0% > >+1 s.d. ----- +116.1% > >Average ----- +62.4% > > The figures on the wiki are different: x86 static -> x86_64 dynamic > has +2.3% runtime. What's going on here? +2.3% on OS X, +14.2% on Linux. Thanks Ian _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users