[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RNG-87?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16805150#comment-16805150
]
Alex D Herbert commented on RNG-87:
-----------------------------------
{quote}What has (mildly) worried me for some time, is that benchmarks may not
reflect actual use-cases.
{quote}
Maybe. I certainly think that the generation performance benchmarks should be
updated to use the same method I used here. Basically set a baseline for the
JMH overhead and then compute the time for each generator as the additional
time over that baseline.
The issue I see with running use cases is that the extra work in doing the use
case, e.g. the shuffle, may swamp the total run time. Then you will see very
little difference between generators. That being said isn't that important to
know. E.g. it doesn't matter what generator you use with regard to speed
performance when you do a shuffle because they are all fast.
I think that we can certainly add benchmarks for:
* Shuffle using nextInt(int)
* Something for nextFloat()
* Something for nextLong()
nextDouble is already covered by the existing user guide table for the
different Gaussian samplers. An easy way to test any sampler with nextFloat()
is to override nextDouble():
{code:java}
@Override
public double nextDouble() {
return nextFloat();
}
{code}
nextLong could be tested likewise by overriding nextInt() to use the long for
the source (upper and lower xor to combine bits) and doing a shuffle.
I was going to raise a new ticket to update the current GenerationPerformance
benchmark to see how it changes the current report for the user guide table.
Then perhaps look at other benchmarks with use cases.
> MultiplyWithCarry256
> --------------------
>
> Key: RNG-87
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RNG-87
> Project: Commons RNG
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.3
> Reporter: Alex D Herbert
> Assignee: Alex D Herbert
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: performance
> Attachments: MWC_256.jpg, MWC_256_2.jpg, MWC_256_3.jpg,
> MWC_256_3.png, Shuffle.jpg, big.jpg, small.jpg
>
> Time Spent: 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> The {{MultiplyWithCarry256}} currently uses a length 256 array for internal
> state. This is cycled through continuously. The current implementation
> refills the state every 256 calls to next:
> {code:java}
> public int next() {
> if (index == Q_SIZE) { // Whole state used up.
> // Refill.
> for (int i = 0; i < Q_SIZE; i++) {
> final long t = A * (state[i] & 0xffffffffL) + carry;
> carry = (int) (t >> 32);
> state[i] = (int) t;
> }
> // Reset current index.
> index = 0;
> }
> return state[index++];
> }
> {code}
> This can be changed to continuously update the state for only a single index
> on each call to next:
> {code:java}
> public int next() {
> // Produce an index in the range 0-255
> final int i = index++ & 0xFF;
> final long t = A * (state[i] & 0xffffffffL) + carry;
> carry = (int) (t >> 32);
> return state[i] = (int) t;
> }
> {code}
> This avoids an {{if}} statement check and *marginally* improves performance.
> It has the advantage of not advancing the state further ahead than necessary.
> MWC_256B is the new version. JMH results from the GenerationPerformance
> benchmark.
> {noformat}
> openjdk version "1.8.0_191"
> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_191-8u191-b12-2ubuntu0.16.04.1-b12)
> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.191-b12, mixed mode)
> {noformat}
> ||numValues||randomSourceName||Method||Score||Error||Median||
> |1|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|0.00478|4.45e-05|0.00477|
> |1|MWC_256|nextInt|0.00521|1.69e-05|0.00521|
> |1|MWC_256B|nextInt|0.00519|0.000321|0.00512|
> |100|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|0.421|0.0131|0.418|
> |100|MWC_256|nextInt|0.452|0.000968|0.452|
> |100|MWC_256B|nextInt|0.443|0.00183|0.442|
> |10000|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|41.7|0.0725|41.7|
> |10000|MWC_256|nextInt|44.5|2.25|43.9|
> |10000|MWC_256B|nextInt|42.6|0.037|42.6|
> |1000000|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|3.77e+03|21.2|3.77e+03|
> |1000000|MWC_256|nextInt|4.16e+03|12.8|4.16e+03|
> |1000000|MWC_256B|nextInt|3.98e+03|120|3.96e+03|
> {noformat}
> java version "11.0.2" 2019-01-15 LTS
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment 18.9 (build 11.0.2+9-LTS)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 18.9 (build 11.0.2+9-LTS, mixed mode)
> {noformat}
> ||numValues||randomSourceName||Method||Score||Error||Median||
> |1|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|0.00469|4.98e-06|0.00469|
> |1|MWC_256|nextInt|0.00553|2.09e-05|0.00553|
> |1|MWC_256B|nextInt|0.00493|4.32e-05|0.00492|
> |100|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|0.435|0.000624|0.435|
> |100|MWC_256|nextInt|0.467|0.00284|0.466|
> |100|MWC_256B|nextInt|0.455|0.00105|0.455|
> |10000|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|43|4.94|41.9|
> |10000|MWC_256|nextInt|45.8|0.132|45.8|
> |10000|MWC_256B|nextInt|43|0.033|43|
> |1000000|SPLIT_MIX_64|nextInt|3.7e+03|7.88|3.7e+03|
> |1000000|MWC_256|nextInt|4.17e+03|45.3|4.15e+03|
> |1000000|MWC_256B|nextInt|4.12e+03|4.76|4.12e+03|
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
