I've moved to my old "faster" Windows PC. Despite being an older model: 
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7300U CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.70 GHz with just 8 GB RAM (older and 
I assume slower SSD, maybe not), it's not plagued by the same CPU-hungry 
Anti-Virus Anti-Malware software running in background. The situation is 
totally different, and the parallel version is slightly faster than serial one 
(10 secs vs 15 secs), but this is happening on both Nim 2.0.0 and Nim 1.4.4. 
Performance wise they are rather in par... however, to be fair, 1.4.4 parallel 
version crash sometimes, so 2.0.0 in this respect is a more solid choice:
    
    
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> ./unzip_parallel
    unzip of all files completed in: 10.024 secs
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> ./unzip_parallel
    unzip of all files completed in: 11.237 secs
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> ./unzip_parallel
    unzip of all files completed in: 10.553 secs
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> 
./unzip_parallel_old
    oserr.nim(94)            raiseOSError
    Error: unhandled exception: The handle is invalid.
     [OSError]
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> 
./unzip_parallel_old
    unzip of all files completed in: 10.858 secs
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> 
./unzip_parallel_old
    unzip of all files completed in: 10.202 secs
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> 
./unzip_parallel_old
    oserr.nim(94)            raiseOSError
    Error: unhandled exception: The handle is invalid.
     [OSError]
    PS C:\Users\Andrea\Documents\Nim\testing_code\nim_parallel> 
./unzip_parallel_old
    unzip of all files completed in: 10.877 secs
    
    
    
    Run

Bottom line is: my work PC sucks, and installed software, particularly 
antivirus / anti-malware (the latter is eating 293 MB and being often the top 
process for CPU usage) could really hurt performance in an unpredictable manner 
(on my work PC serial version can use at most 14.9% of CPU, and parallel drops 
much lower, down to 2-3%, on my old home PC, parallel version use more than 95% 
CPU) . Thank you and sorry for bothering you.

Reply via email to