Again just badly written multithreading. It is still much faster than processPhraseTableMin, isn't EMS running them in parallel or something? (I don't use EMS).
On 18.02.2016 08:59, Vincent Nguyen wrote: > yeah but then if in EMS we want to use ProcessPhrasetablemin with 8 threads > and ProcessLexicalTableMin with 4 threads, difficult, right ? > > just letting you know, with 8 threads the processlexicaltablemin seems > to run with 1 thread only ..... > > > > Le 17/02/2016 23:16, Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt a écrit : >> I just checked, it's really weirdly slow now. Apparently using more than >> 4 threads is a bad idea. But 4 threads seems to be about 2 times faster >> than just one. I remember that used to work better. Maybe because I >> haven't tcmalloc linked? >> >> On 17.02.2016 23:07, Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt wrote: >>> It is, just not very well done. It generally does not make sense to have >>> more than 8-10 threads. That should however be somewhat faster than only >>> a single thread. >>> >>> On 17.02.2016 22:44, Vincent Nguyen wrote: >>>> I have the feeling it's not. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moses-support mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moses-support mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support >> _______________________________________________ >> Moses-support mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support > _______________________________________________ > Moses-support mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support _______________________________________________ Moses-support mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
