it might help to have tests in a state that you can ask others to run them; a dozen or so other random boxes will help you gain the confidence you seek I think....
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Alexey Nezhdanov <[email protected]> wrote: > > new testing: > > ---- SERVER KERNEL ---- > --prints > r875 0.04898 > r822ini 0.03070 1.60x > --silent > r875 0.04914 > r822ini 0.03049 1.61x > > So I get much more consistent results on this hardware. > While this is obviously not the best perfomance (my weaker box, > with less RAM, troubled with video output 1280x1024, > software 90deg rotation - performs BETTER), that does not matter. > What does - is that I can now be sure that these results are > noise-free so I can safely compare timings from various patches. > Proceeding with writing 'inits v2'. > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Alexey Nezhdanov<[email protected]> > wrote: > > Ok. Now the confusion is resolved. > > 1) Speed improvements of 70% and up that I reported yesterday are > > really exist. I just reproduced a 3.47 times model speedup and 2.15 > > overall speedup for my app (r875 vs r822+inits). > > BUT this app is atypical. I have added some time measuring code there > > so it prints out two lines per each model init. So when I am testing > > perfomance - screen very quickly scrolls up > > > > 2) Simply commenting out two print statements gives me only 1.67 > > overall speedup given equal other conditions. I think that processor > > receive additional interrupts from videocard that in turn results in > > more often checks of tasks queue. > > > > 3) I declare all my previous testing results spoiled by noise > > generated by print statement and inappropriate kernel scheduler > > setting. > > I've set up yet another test box with these parameters: > > > > Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz, 2G RAM, Ubuntu 9.04, 'server' flavour kernel > > 2.6.28-11.42. Initially I considered to install a 'realtime' kernel, > > but it appeared to be unstable on that hardware (and afterall - it's > > for sound/video processing and 'server' type is more likely to be > > installed on servers). > > > > Will report new testing results (and finally I hope to write > > 'optimised inits ver.2' patch) later today. > > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:14 AM, mdipierro<[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Please try launchpad 893. I think it should be faster on GAE. > >> We can do better with lazy tables but at least the validators and > >> calls to getitem are eliminated. > >> > >> Massimo > >> > >> On Jun 8, 1:05 pm, Markus Gritsch <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 5:54 PM, mdipierro<[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > the web2py in trunk can execute models 2.5x faster than the current > >>> > stable/production version (requires migrate=False and bytecode > >>> > compiled models). > >>> > >>> Will this speedup also has an effect on GAE? IMO one uploads no .pyc > files? > >>> > >>> Markus > >> >> > >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
