Hi Seb,

Sebastien Lelong wrote:

>     I have only 539 samples after I removed some this morning. And I have
>     only 'elapsed' time (probably your real time) on an otherwise empty
>     system. I did 3 runs with each compiler.
> 
>      2.4l  199.02  186.24  186.28
>      2.4m  138.82  136.35  136.55
>             (times in seconds)
> 
>     The very first measurement is somewhat longer (or better formulated: the
>     others are shorter) because of disk caching. The third and fourth column
>     are consistent and show that 2.4m is almost 25% faster than 2.4l on my
>     system.
> 
> 
> I think it's maybe about compiler's compilation itself. I guess you're 
> using it under eCom, right ? So this means yo compiled jalv2 from 
> sources ? I did use binary distribution (so "jalv2" exec in zip).

Yes, my measurements were with eCS and an eCS(OS/2) executable built 
from the compiler sources. But I can hardly believe that this would make 
such a difference. I did not change anything in the source!

> 
>     I see that in absolute sense my system is about 10 times faster than
>     yours. That surprises me: I have certainly not an extreme PC with an AMD
>     Athlon 64 X2 3800 processor. And only a single processor is really used
>     in this case because the compiler is single threaded and so is the
>     script (no parallel compilations).
> 
> 
>  
> My server is: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.00GHz, with 512MB RAM. So mine 
> running slower isn't a surprise for me, now 10 times may be a little bit 
> too much ?

I'll see if I can do comparable measurements under Linux or Windows.

Regards, Rob.

-- 
Rob Hamerling, Vianen, NL (http://www.robh.nl/)

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to