Hi Doru, On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Eliot, > > Thanks for looking at this. > > Please let us know what support you need, or what kind of experiments we > can do on our side. > What I want most of all is a test case that I can run on Mac. I'm assuming that I can just copy the job that Vincent mentioned in his email and use that as a test case. Do you see any issues with that? If so, how do I get a really bug MOOSE test case to run on Mac? > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On Jan 24, 2016, at 9:20 PM, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > I'll take a look early this week. There's clearly a bug; the Spur > > GC is /not/ collecting those dictionaries :-( (thanks Stephan!). > > Assuming the bug is fixed times should come down (see below). It may > > be that the bug in Slang that I introduced in December has broken > > things because I don't see these symptoms in my daily work (but I use > > the most up-to-date VM version possible ;-) ). But I'm not in denial > > and look forward to using MOOSE as a good stress case. > > > > I do want to say that the GC is not complete. Right now we have a > > scavenger that works well, and a global GC that has a slow compaction > > algorithm, and hence there are significant pauses. For example here's > > what I see as typical in using SPur for VMMaker work: > > > > memory 160,432,128 bytes > > old 153,658,624 bytes (95.8%) > > young 4,838,224 bytes (3%) > > used 127,009,928 bytes (79.2%) > > free 28,126,456 bytes (17.5%) > > GCs 7,265 (?? ms between GCs) > > full 36 totalling 13,229 ms (0% uptime), avg 367.5 ms > > incr 7,229 totalling 6,546 ms (0% uptime), avg 0.9 ms > > tenures 3,589,063 (avg 0 GCs/tenure) > > > > (There's no uptime in the above stats because we're still > > transitioning Squeak to the 64-bit clock and there are consequently > > bugs in computing uptime). > > > > The plan is to add an incremental global GC so this work is broken up > > into much smaller pieces. I don't want to see 700ms pauses in global > > GC; one can't do game animation with that. So an incremental > > mark-sweep is needed. There are two nice papers we're considering, > > one from Lua and one for a truly concurrent collector. But time is > > pressing, so if anyone out there knows GC and is interested in helping > > this is a nicely self-contained project for which we'd love to have > > volunteers. > > > > _,,,^..^,,,_ (phone) > > > >> On Jan 24, 2016, at 3:43 AM, Vincent BLONDEAU < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I made the benchmarks with the files you provided. I have more or less > the > >> same magnitude: > >> Version 504: 0:00:01:09.021 > >> Version 1175: 0:00:02:37.507 > >> > >> However, by launching it in the time profiler (MooseModel new > >> importFromMSEStream: (StandardFileStream readOnlyFileNamed: > >> 'd:/ArgoUML-0-34.mse')), it takes > >> 504: 1 min 55 > >> 1175: 4 min 25 > >> Well there is a delta... > >> > >> After investigation, the standard process has almost the same duration > (120 > >> secs for prespur and 140 secs for spur). > >> But, there is a large difference in GC time: > >> > >> 504: not spur > >> **Memory** > >> old +144,822,000 bytes > >> young -8,293,660 bytes > >> used +136,528,340 bytes > >> free -104,186,788 bytes > >> > >> **GCs** > >> full 1 totalling 965ms (1.0% uptime), avg 965.0ms > >> incr 3264 totalling 42,279ms (33.0% uptime), avg 13.0ms > >> tenures 2,497 (avg 1 GCs/tenure) > >> root table 0 overflows > >> > >> 1175: spur > >> **Memory** > >> old +0 bytes > >> young +340,048 bytes > >> used +340,048 bytes > >> free -340,048 bytes > >> **GCs** > >> full 7 totalling 145,003ms (66.0% uptime), avg > >> 20715.0ms > >> incr 3288 totalling 30,912ms (14.0% uptime), avg 9.0ms > >> tenures 7,146,505 (avg 0 GCs/tenure) > >> root table 0 overflows > >> > >> Total GC time > >> 504: 43 secs > >> 1175: 176 secs > >> > >> See the performance reports attached. > >> > >> I let VM people take care of the issue ;) > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Vincent > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tudor Girba > >> Sent: dimanche 24 janvier 2016 09:08 > >> To: Moose-related development > >> Subject: [Moose-dev] Re: mse loading looks slower :( > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I am talking about the difference between Moose 6 images: > >> - October 7: > >> https://ci.inria.fr/moose/job/moose-6.0/504/artifact/moose-6.0.zip > >> > >> - yesterday: > >> https://ci.inria.fr/moose/job/moose-6.0/1175/artifact/moose-6.0.zip > >> > >> Multiple things did change, but not in Moose. In the end, I would like > to > >> understand where the slowness comes. Maybe it comes from Spur itself, > but > >> maybe it comes from somewhere else. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Doru > >> > >> > >> > >>>> On Jan 24, 2016, at 1:41 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < > [email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Doru...just to be sure it is not a Pharo (image change), when you said > >> before and after Spur, do you mean a Pharo 5.0 exactly (just before > Spur) > >> and a Pharo JUST after it? Otherwise, the slowness may come from the > >> difference between the 2 Pharos you are running. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I am doing some performance testing of Moose with the Spur VM on Mac. > >>> > >>> I tried to load an MSE file with ArgoUML 0.34 and on my machine it > loads > >> twice as slow with Spur than before: > >>> - PreSpur: 0:00:01:07.272 > >>> - Spur: 0:00:02:10.508 > >>> > >>> Here is the reference file: > >>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18323746/Tmp/ArgoUML-0-34.mse.zip > >>> > >>> And here is the script: > >>> [ > >>> MooseModel new > >>> importFromMSEStream: (StandardFileStream > >> readOnlyFileNamed: > >>> (FileSystem workingDirectory / 'src' / > >> 'ArgoUML-0-34' / 'ArgoUML-0-34.mse') fullName). > >>> ] timeToRun > >>> > >>> Do you get the same? > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Doru > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> www.tudorgirba.com > >>> www.feenk.com > >>> > >>> "Problem solving should be focused on describing the problem in a way > >>> that makes the solution obvious." > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Moose-dev mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Mariano > >>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Moose-dev mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > >> > >> -- > >> www.tudorgirba.com > >> www.feenk.com > >> > >> "What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?" > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Moose-dev mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > >> <report504.txt> > >> <report1175.txt> > > > > > -- _,,,^..^,,,_ best, Eliot
