Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Michael Gerdau]

Am 23.03.24 um 17:55 schrieb Karlin High:
The attached zip folder is what I used in the previous post. It was 
derived from a post by Vaughan McAlley in 2016, updated via convert-ly 
to the version in question here.


It looks like back in 2016, on the same computer I now have, LilyPond 
2.19.46 was taking 1 min 4 seconds for it.


How carefully did you compare?
Given the 7 warnings
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)
Warning: the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing 
error)


in divisionis.ly I'd expect some subtle spacing changes involving the 
various barlines etc. derived from breathing signs. I have no doubt that 
it looks close enough though.



Congrats on the speed-up, developers!


Definitely.

For the record:
real0m13,203s
user0m12,789s
sys 0m0,347s

on my AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS Notebook with 32GB RAM on ArchLinux.

Kind regards,
Michael
--
 Michael Gerdau   email: m...@qata.de
 GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Mathieu Demange]

Hello,

Here are my results for MSDM.ly  on a M2 Max MacBook Pro:

real 12.11
user 11.02
sys 1.06

Thanks a lot!

Mathieu

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Michael Käppler]

Am 24.03.2024 um 11:50 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld:

Just out of interest, do we tweak the JIT_THRESHOLD somewhere or do we
use the default value?

I don't think we change it from LilyPond, so likely using the default
value.

I did a test with the opposite extremes.
Again, 10 subsequent runs with the score I tested before.
Note that the times are not quite comparable with my last findings,
because my laptop
ran on a different energy saving state.

GUILE_JIT_THRESHOLD=0 (compile each function at first sight)
real    4m8.780s
user    0m0.075s
sys 0m0.167s

GUILE_JIT_THRESHOLD=-1 (disable JIT compilation)
real    4m4.925s
user    0m0.030s
sys 0m0.136s

So either the env variable is not working as intended, or there is only
a very small effect.
At least setting `GUILE_JIT_LOG` does work, but one would have to read
the source
to understand the output.

Michael

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Aaron Hill]

On 2024-03-24 3:45 am, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:

On Sun, 2024-03-24 at 03:20 -0700, Aaron Hill wrote:

Based on the email thread you linked, perhaps I should nuke all my WSL
distros at this point and start from scratch with the latest Ubuntu 
(22,

I gather).  Not sure if Alma is an option for WSL.


You don't need Alma, the binaries should run on any distribution that
is newer than that. Ubuntu is perfectly fine, and likely better tested
with WSL (but I don't have experience with it myself).



Yeah, Ubuntu has been the de facto default for WSL, as it was my 
understanding that Canonical and Microsoft teamed up to create the 
original WSL project.


Interestingly, it turns out Alma is a supported WSL distro (8 and 9 are 
both in the Windows Store).



-- Aaron Hill

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Robert Garrigos]

I did convert this Carver Mass to 2.25.13 and created the pdf with no error but 
the following warning:

the property 'extra-X-extent' does not exist (perhaps a typing error)

and

warning: The MIDI channel is tuned around
warning: module 16 will be remapped
(actually, I got these last messages in Catalan. Translated with Google. The 
actual message in English might vary)

I used a MacBook Pro, with Visual Studio Code and the new code compiled for 
ARM. It just took a few seconds. Great!!


> El 23 març 2024, a les 17:55, Karlin High  va escriure:
> 
> On 3/23/2024 11:39 AM, Robin Bannister wrote:
>> I have nothing large.
> 
> The attached zip folder is what I used in the previous post. It was derived 
> from a post by Vaughan McAlley in 2016, updated via convert-ly to the version 
> in question here.
> 
> It looks like back in 2016, on the same computer I now have, LilyPond 2.19.46 
> was taking 1 min 4 seconds for it.
> 
> Congrats on the speed-up, developers!
> -- 
> Karlin High
> Missouri, USA
> 

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 23:53 +0100, Hans Aikema wrote:
> > Jonas,
> > 
> > I ran this same file my Apple M1 MacBook Pro 2021 against
> > 
> > MacPorts lilypond-devel (which is still at 2.25.13) aarch64 build
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
> > ( lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  15.78s user 2.27s system 100% cpu 
> > 17.994 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
> > ( lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  15.80s user 2.27s system 100% cpu 
> > 18.012 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
> > ( lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  15.80s user 2.29s system 100% cpu 
> > 18.017 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % lilypond -v
> > GNU LilyPond 2.25.13 (running Guile 2.2)
> > 
> > Your aarch64 build of 2.25.14
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> 
> > /dev/null )
> > ( ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  17.07s user 
> > 2.20s system 99% cpu 19.340 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> 
> > /dev/null )
> > ( ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  17.06s user 
> > 2.18s system 99% cpu 19.307 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> 
> > /dev/null )
> > ( ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  17.19s user 
> > 2.19s system 99% cpu 19.478 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond -v
> > GNU LilyPond 2.25.14 (running Guile 3.0)
> > 
> > Standard published x64 MacOS Build for 2.25.14
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 
> > 2>/dev/null )
> > ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  27.69s user 
> > 2.48s system 99% cpu 30.456 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 
> > 2>/dev/null )
> > ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  27.60s user 
> > 2.42s system 99% cpu 30.280 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % time ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 
> > 2>/dev/null )
> > ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  27.94s user 
> > 2.43s system 99% cpu 30.661 total
> > aikebah@rajah MSDM % ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond -v                 
> >   
> > GNU LilyPond 2.25.14 (running Guile 3.0)
> > 
> > A clear improvement over running the x64 build using Rosetta and slightly 
> > slower than the 2.25.13 Guild 2.2 build of MacPorts

Indeed, great! Thanks for testing!


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 23:03 +0100, Michael Käppler wrote:
> Hi Jonas,
> thanks for working on this!
> 
> > Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj
> > This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but
> > we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially
> > on larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.
> 
> I gave it a try with a medium-sized score (appr. 60 pages A4),
> 10 times in a row:
> 
> with JIT:
> real    4m42.513s
> user    0m0.090s
> sys 0m0.185s
> 
> without JIT:
> real    4m45.295s
> user    0m0.046s
> sys 0m0.277s

Thanks for testing on a larger score!

> Just out of interest, do we tweak the JIT_THRESHOLD somewhere or do we
> use the default value?

I don't think we change it from LilyPond, so likely using the default
value.

Jonas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 14:08 -0700, Kenneth Wolcott wrote:
> Hi Jonas;
> 
>   I hope that the following information is useful:
> 
> Lilypond performance stats for the engraving of one very small and one
> medium sized pieces
> 
> native = Apple Silicon build
> foreign = x86_64
> other = MacPorts LP 2.24.3
> 
> ~/Downloads/native_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
> ./Danny_Boy_updated.ly  0.53s user 0.06s system 87% cpu 0.683 total
> ~/Downloads/foreign_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
> ./Danny_Boy_updated.ly  0.93s user 0.09s system 101% cpu 1.010 total
> /opt/local/bin/lilypond ./Danny_Boy.ly  0.48s user 0.06s system 104%
> cpu 0.515 total
> 
> ~/Downloads/native_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
> ./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly  1.07s user 0.10s system 102% cpu 1.145 total
> ~/Downloads/foreign_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
> ./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly  1.76s user 0.15s system 100% cpu 1.907 total
> /opt/local/bin/lilypond ./Waltz_Nr2.ly  1.06s user 0.12s system 103%
> cpu 1.140 total
> 
> for i in ./Danny_Boy.ly ./Danny_Boy_updated.ly ./Waltz_Nr2.ly
> ./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly
> for> do
> for> wc $i
> for> done
>  232 8144641 ./Danny_Boy.ly
>  232 8144642 ./Danny_Boy_updated.ly
>  9393892   19981 ./Waltz_Nr2.ly
>  9393892   19982 ./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly

Great, winning more than a factor 1.5x compared to the x86_64 binaries
sounds reasonable 🙂


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 14:24 -0500, Karlin High wrote:
> On 3/23/2024 2:00 PM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > Would be interesting to see how this compares to the "vanilla" package
> 
> I tried it, 3 runs. First one maybe unfair because font cache 
> initialization or something.
> 
> real0m48.643s
> user0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.031s
> 
> real0m31.457s
> user0m0.015s
> sys 0m0.000s
> 
> real0m31.591s
> user0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.031s
> 
> The another with the JIT version:
> 
> real0m32.319s
> user0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.030s
> 
> But I expect I should get the computer otherwise idle as far as possible 
> for this. I had other software running, but nothing with heavy loads.

Thanks for testing! Not as good as I had hoped, but also not (much)
worse than before...


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sun, 2024-03-24 at 03:20 -0700, Aaron Hill wrote:
> The error occurred from my WSL1 environment running Ubuntu 18.04.  
> Probably my own fault for keeping bionic around.

Ah ok; yes, Ubuntu 18.04 is end-of-life since last year already, so I
didn't check its versions.

> I do have Ubuntu 20.04 under WSL2.  I can confirm 2.25.14 runs under 
> focal without complaining about glibc.

Good.

> Based on the email thread you linked, perhaps I should nuke all my WSL 
> distros at this point and start from scratch with the latest Ubuntu (22, 
> I gather).  Not sure if Alma is an option for WSL.

You don't need Alma, the binaries should run on any distribution that
is newer than that. Ubuntu is perfectly fine, and likely better tested
with WSL (but I don't have experience with it myself).

Jonas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Aaron Hill]

On 2024-03-24 1:23 am, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 18:18 -0700, Aaron Hill wrote:

On 2024-03-23 6:25 am, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
> termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
> testing new features and recent bug fixes. However, if you require
> stability, we recommend using version 2.24.3, the current stable
> release.
> Please refer to the Installing section in the Learning Manual for
> instructions how to set up the provided binaries:
> https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.25/Documentation/learning/installing

####
/opt/lilypond/2.25.14/bin/lilypond: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6:
version `GLIBC_2.28' not found (required by
/opt/lilypond/2.25.14/bin/lilypond)


Something changed from .13 to .14?  I'm presuming my system is just
out-of-date, and this might be expected.


Yes, 2.25.14 is built in Alma Linux 8 instead of CentOS 7 which raises
the glibc requirement. I didn't mention it in the release email because
I thought it wouldn't make a practical difference as outlined in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2024-02/msg00052.html
Which distribution are you running?



The error occurred from my WSL1 environment running Ubuntu 18.04.  
Probably my own fault for keeping bionic around.


I do have Ubuntu 20.04 under WSL2.  I can confirm 2.25.14 runs under 
focal without complaining about glibc.


Based on the email thread you linked, perhaps I should nuke all my WSL 
distros at this point and start from scratch with the latest Ubuntu (22, 
I gather).  Not sure if Alma is an option for WSL.



-- Aaron Hill

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 18:18 -0700, Aaron Hill wrote:
> On 2024-03-23 6:25 am, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
> > termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
> > testing new features and recent bug fixes. However, if you require
> > stability, we recommend using version 2.24.3, the current stable
> > release.
> > Please refer to the Installing section in the Learning Manual for
> > instructions how to set up the provided binaries:
> > https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.25/Documentation/learning/installing
> 
> 
> /opt/lilypond/2.25.14/bin/lilypond: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: 
> version `GLIBC_2.28' not found (required by 
> /opt/lilypond/2.25.14/bin/lilypond)
> 
> 
> Something changed from .13 to .14?  I'm presuming my system is just 
> out-of-date, and this might be expected.

Yes, 2.25.14 is built in Alma Linux 8 instead of CentOS 7 which raises
the glibc requirement. I didn't mention it in the release email because
I thought it wouldn't make a practical difference as outlined in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2024-02/msg00052.html
Which distribution are you running?

Jonas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Aaron Hill]

On 2024-03-23 6:25 am, Jonas Hahnfeld via Discussions on LilyPond 
development wrote:

We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
testing new features and recent bug fixes. However, if you require
stability, we recommend using version 2.24.3, the current stable
release.
Please refer to the Installing section in the Learning Manual for
instructions how to set up the provided binaries:
https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.25/Documentation/learning/installing




/opt/lilypond/2.25.14/bin/lilypond: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: 
version `GLIBC_2.28' not found (required by 
/opt/lilypond/2.25.14/bin/lilypond)



Something changed from .13 to .14?  I'm presuming my system is just 
out-of-date, and this might be expected.



-- Aaron Hill

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Hans Aikema]

On 23 Mar 2024, at 17:55, Karlin High  wrote:On 3/23/2024 11:39 AM, Robin Bannister wrote:I have nothing large.The attached zip folder is what I used in the previous post. It was derived from a post by Vaughan McAlley in 2016, updated via convert-ly to the version in question here.It looks like back in 2016, on the same computer I now have, LilyPond 2.19.46 was taking 1 min 4 seconds for it.Congrats on the speed-up, developers!-- Karlin HighMissouri, USA<>
Jonas,I ran this same file my Apple M1 MacBook Pro 2021 againstMacPorts lilypond-devel (which is still at 2.25.13) aarch64 buildaikebah@rajah MSDM % time (lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
( lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  15.78s user 2.27s system 100% cpu 17.994 total
aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
( lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  15.80s user 2.27s system 100% cpu 18.012 total
aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
( lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  15.80s user 2.29s system 100% cpu 18.017 total
aikebah@rajah MSDM % lilypond -v
GNU LilyPond 2.25.13 (running Guile 2.2)Your aarch64 build of 2.25.14aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
( ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  17.07s user 2.20s system 99% cpu 19.340 total
aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
( ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  17.06s user 2.18s system 99% cpu 19.307 total
aikebah@rajah MSDM % time (../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null )
( ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  17.19s user 2.19s system 99% cpu 19.478 totalaikebah@rajah MSDM % ../lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond -v
GNU LilyPond 2.25.14 (running Guile 3.0)Standard published x64 MacOS Build for 2.25.14aikebah@rajah MSDM % time ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2>/dev/null )( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  27.69s user 2.48s system 99% cpu 30.456 totalaikebah@rajah MSDM % time ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2>/dev/null )( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  27.60s user 2.42s system 99% cpu 30.280 totalaikebah@rajah MSDM % time ( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2>/dev/null )( ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond MSDM.ly 2> /dev/null; )  27.94s user 2.43s system 99% cpu 30.661 totalaikebah@rajah MSDM % ../lilypond-2.25.14x64/bin/lilypond -v                   GNU LilyPond 2.25.14 (running Guile 3.0)A clear improvement over running the x64 build using Rosetta and slightly slower than the 2.25.13 Guild 2.2 build of MacPorts

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Michael Käppler]

Hi Jonas,
thanks for working on this!


Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj
This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but
we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially
on larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.

I gave it a try with a medium-sized score (appr. 60 pages A4),
10 times in a row:

with JIT:
real    4m42.513s
user    0m0.090s
sys 0m0.185s

without JIT:
real    4m45.295s
user    0m0.046s
sys 0m0.277s

Just out of interest, do we tweak the JIT_THRESHOLD somewhere or do we
use the default value?

Michael

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Kenneth Wolcott]

Hi Jonas;

  I hope that the following information is useful:

Lilypond performance stats for the engraving of one very small and one
medium sized pieces

native = Apple Silicon build
foreign = x86_64
other = MacPorts LP 2.24.3

~/Downloads/native_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
./Danny_Boy_updated.ly  0.53s user 0.06s system 87% cpu 0.683 total
~/Downloads/foreign_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
./Danny_Boy_updated.ly  0.93s user 0.09s system 101% cpu 1.010 total
/opt/local/bin/lilypond ./Danny_Boy.ly  0.48s user 0.06s system 104%
cpu 0.515 total

~/Downloads/native_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly  1.07s user 0.10s system 102% cpu 1.145 total
~/Downloads/foreign_lilypond-2.25.14/bin/lilypond
./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly  1.76s user 0.15s system 100% cpu 1.907 total
/opt/local/bin/lilypond ./Waltz_Nr2.ly  1.06s user 0.12s system 103%
cpu 1.140 total

for i in ./Danny_Boy.ly ./Danny_Boy_updated.ly ./Waltz_Nr2.ly
./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly
for> do
for> wc $i
for> done
 232 8144641 ./Danny_Boy.ly
 232 8144642 ./Danny_Boy_updated.ly
 9393892   19981 ./Waltz_Nr2.ly
 9393892   19982 ./Waltz_Nr2_updated.ly

Ken Wolcott

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 12:09 PM Jonas Hahnfeld  wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 11:39 -0700, Kenneth Wolcott wrote:
> > Hi Jonas;
> >
> >   I've tried engraving a couple of randomly chosen previous engravings
> > (using LP 2.24.x) using the new LP 2.25.14 version on my Mac (Apple
> > Silicon).
> >
> >   Since none of my engravings are large, most of them are one to two
> > pages in length, I thought there would be no noticable decrease in
> > engraving time, but I was wrong!  It IS noticably faster for even
> > small files :-)
> >
> >   One thing I noticed is what one of my engravings had significant
> > change in apperance in the second and third page, as if I had inserted
> > a forced page break in two or three places.  There were no conversion
> > errors or warnings in any of my engravings.
> >
> >   I don't know what was the cause of the speedup, but it is
> > appreciated! I have been using the MacPorts version of Lilypond 2.24.3
> > compared to this recent test release.
>
> Thanks for testing! The performance advantage probably comes from Guile
> 3.0 in our binaries of 2.25.14 versus Guile 2.2 with the MacPorts
> version, having a faster startup time which matters especially for
> smaller files. If you have some time, I would be really interested in
> seeing a comparison with LilyPond 2.25.14 from
> https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/packages/23923980 when the
> x86_64 executable is run through Rosetta on Apple Silicon...
>
> Jonas

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Karlin High]

On 3/23/2024 2:00 PM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:

Would be interesting to see how this compares to the "vanilla" package


I tried it, 3 runs. First one maybe unfair because font cache 
initialization or something.


real0m48.643s
user0m0.000s
sys 0m0.031s

real0m31.457s
user0m0.015s
sys 0m0.000s

real0m31.591s
user0m0.000s
sys 0m0.031s

The another with the JIT version:

real0m32.319s
user0m0.000s
sys 0m0.030s

But I expect I should get the computer otherwise idle as far as possible 
for this. I had other software running, but nothing with heavy loads.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 11:39 -0700, Kenneth Wolcott wrote:
> Hi Jonas;
> 
>   I've tried engraving a couple of randomly chosen previous engravings
> (using LP 2.24.x) using the new LP 2.25.14 version on my Mac (Apple
> Silicon).
> 
>   Since none of my engravings are large, most of them are one to two
> pages in length, I thought there would be no noticable decrease in
> engraving time, but I was wrong!  It IS noticably faster for even
> small files :-)
> 
>   One thing I noticed is what one of my engravings had significant
> change in apperance in the second and third page, as if I had inserted
> a forced page break in two or three places.  There were no conversion
> errors or warnings in any of my engravings.
> 
>   I don't know what was the cause of the speedup, but it is
> appreciated! I have been using the MacPorts version of Lilypond 2.24.3
> compared to this recent test release.

Thanks for testing! The performance advantage probably comes from Guile
3.0 in our binaries of 2.25.14 versus Guile 2.2 with the MacPorts
version, having a faster startup time which matters especially for
smaller files. If you have some time, I would be really interested in
seeing a comparison with LilyPond 2.25.14 from
https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/packages/23923980 when the
x86_64 executable is run through Rosetta on Apple Silicon...

Jonas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 11:41 -0500, Karlin High wrote:
> On 3/23/2024 10:02 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion wrote:
> > Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj 
> > This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but 
> > we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially on 
> > larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.
> 
> Carver MSDM.ly, subject of many past performance-test posts.
> 
> Inte Core i5-3450
> 24 GB RAM
> Windows 10 22H2
> 
> real 0m32.109s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.015s

Would be interesting to see how this compares to the "vanilla" package
here: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/packages/23923980 ... But
I guess I can also do this test on my end since the score is public.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Kenneth Wolcott]

Hi Jonas;

  I've tried engraving a couple of randomly chosen previous engravings
(using LP 2.24.x) using the new LP 2.25.14 version on my Mac (Apple
Silicon).

  Since none of my engravings are large, most of them are one to two
pages in length, I thought there would be no noticable decrease in
engraving time, but I was wrong!  It IS noticably faster for even
small files :-)

  One thing I noticed is what one of my engravings had significant
change in apperance in the second and third page, as if I had inserted
a forced page break in two or three places.  There were no conversion
errors or warnings in any of my engravings.

  I don't know what was the cause of the speedup, but it is
appreciated! I have been using the MacPorts version of Lilypond 2.24.3
compared to this recent test release.

Thanks to all who have made this an awesome product!

Ken Wolcott

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 10:20 AM Kenneth Wolcott
 wrote:
>
> WOW!!! Apple Silicon support!!!
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 8:03 AM Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user
> discussion  wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 14:25 +0100, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > > We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
> > > termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
> > > testing new features and recent bug fixes.
> >
> > Following this release, I made two special builds with the changes
> > proposed in https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2283
> > that would be great to get more widespread testing:
> >
> > Native Apple Silicon build: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/x9D62eASSn6Ng7D
> > This is a native arm64 version for macOS 12+; if you have a Mac, please
> > test and (hopefully) confirm the performance advantage over running the
> > x86_64 build via Rosetta 2 🙂
> >
> > Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj
> > This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but
> > we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially
> > on larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Jonas
>

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Karlin High]

On 3/23/2024 11:39 AM, Robin Bannister wrote:

I have nothing large.


The attached zip folder is what I used in the previous post. It was 
derived from a post by Vaughan McAlley in 2016, updated via convert-ly 
to the version in question here.


It looks like back in 2016, on the same computer I now have, LilyPond 
2.19.46 was taking 1 min 4 seconds for it.


Congrats on the speed-up, developers!
--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA
<>

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Robin Bannister]

Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion wrote:


Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj
This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but
we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially
on larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.




GNU LilyPond 2.25.14 (running Guile 3.0)
Processing `3.ly'
Parsing...
Interpreting music...
Interpreting music...[8][16][24][32][40][48][56][64][72][80][88][96][104]
Preprocessing graphical objects...
MIDI output to `3.mid'...
Finding the ideal number of pages...
Fitting music on 3 or 4 pages...
Drawing systems...
Converting to `3.pdf'...
Success: compilation successfully completed


No problem here on Win7, but I have nothing large.
  N.B. the log doesn't mention JIT mode.


Cheers,
Robin

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Karlin High]

On 3/23/2024 10:02 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion wrote:
Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj 
This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but 
we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially on 
larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.


Carver MSDM.ly, subject of many past performance-test posts.

Inte Core i5-3450
24 GB RAM
Windows 10 22H2

real 0m32.109s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.015s

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Kenneth Wolcott]

WOW!!! Apple Silicon support!!!

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 8:03 AM Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user
discussion  wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 14:25 +0100, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
> > termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
> > testing new features and recent bug fixes.
>
> Following this release, I made two special builds with the changes
> proposed in https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2283
> that would be great to get more widespread testing:
>
> Native Apple Silicon build: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/x9D62eASSn6Ng7D
> This is a native arm64 version for macOS 12+; if you have a Mac, please
> test and (hopefully) confirm the performance advantage over running the
> x86_64 build via Rosetta 2 🙂
>
> Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj
> This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but
> we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially
> on larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.
>
> Cheers
> Jonas

Re: LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

On Sat, 2024-03-23 at 14:25 +0100, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
> termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
> testing new features and recent bug fixes.

Following this release, I made two special builds with the changes
proposed in https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2283
that would be great to get more widespread testing:

Native Apple Silicon build: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/x9D62eASSn6Ng7D
This is a native arm64 version for macOS 12+; if you have a Mac, please
test and (hopefully) confirm the performance advantage over running the
x86_64 build via Rosetta 2 🙂

Windows build with Guile JIT: https://cloud.hahnjo.de/s/Ek5x9rybpiPNtoj
This turns on just-in-time compilation that was added in Guile 3.0, but
we had to keep disabled on Windows until now. Please test, especially
on larger scores where this should provide a performance advantage.

Cheers
Jonas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

LilyPond 2.25.14

[Jonas Hahnfeld via LilyPond user discussion]

We are happy to announce the release of LilyPond 2.25.14. This is
termed a development release, but these are usually reliable for
testing new features and recent bug fixes. However, if you require
stability, we recommend using version 2.24.3, the current stable
release.
Please refer to the Installing section in the Learning Manual for
instructions how to set up the provided binaries:
https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.25/Documentation/learning/installing


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part