Sorry about the mistake with 32-bit in my previous message; I read your earlier postings too quickly and misunderstood.
I can't compare the output of your Profile.print() to mine, because versioninfo() on my machine runs so fast that it doesn't leave a profile. I also am not able to figure out anything from the printout of @profile versioninfo() that you posted on pastebin because, as far as I can see, the printout does not even show the invocation of versioninfo(). Instead, the profiling appears to contain multiple recursive calls to eval and inferencing routines, which I suppose must be the setting-up portion of profiling before the actual function begins. The only other thing I can think of is: Possibly Julia on your system has been linked against a debug rather than production version of the memory allocator/deallocator? I think that all the nested calls to eval and inferencing showing up in the profile printout involve millions of calls to the heap allocator. One way to check this would be to time a function that involves multiple calls to the allocator (say, one that creates arrays in an inner loop) versus a function that involves mostly stack operations (say, a lot of floating point arithmetic). See how these timings or profiles compare to the timings/profiles of the same functions in a Julia installation that is working properly. -- Steve Vavasis On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 1:26:04 PM UTC-4, Chris wrote: > > (2) Did you try @profile versioninfo() followed by Profile.print()? >> > > The result is very long, but I posted it here: > http://pastebin.com/dBfXmxfy. > > You can try `@time srand("/dev/urandom")` and see how long it takes. >> > > julia> @time srand("/dev/urandom") > elapsed time: 0.278176012 seconds (15944 bytes allocated) > > julia> @time srand("/dev/urandom") > elapsed time: 0.254156666 seconds (664 bytes allocated) > > On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-4, Elliot Saba wrote: >> >> I believe his machine is 64-bit (that's what WORD_SIZE: 64 means in >> versioninfo() above), he merely has 32 cores. :) >> -E >> >> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:05 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I am probably the wrong person to help with this since I know next to >>> nothing about the internals of Julia, Linux or intel processors... but let >>> me toss out the following remarks: >>> >>> (1) Your earlier messages state that your processors are 32-bit and yet >>> you are running a 64-bit version of Julia. Did you try downloading and >>> testing a 32-bit version of Julia? >>> >>> (2) Did you try @profile versioninfo() followed by Profile.print()? >>> >>> -- Steve Vavasis >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 11:29:53 AM UTC-4, Chris wrote: >>>> >>>> I thought so. Is there a different function in 0.3 that will give the >>>> same kind of information? Any other ideas? >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 8:16:56 PM UTC-4, Steven G. Johnson >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 8:15:18 PM UTC-4, Chris wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> ERROR: RandomDevice not defined >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, August 26, 2015 at 6:13:12 PM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can you do @time RandomDevice() and see how long that takes? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> RandomDevice() is only in Julia 0.4. >>>>> >>>> >>
