[darcs-users] darcs patch: switch Darcs.Patch.FileName to be ByteString.Char8 int...

[Jason Dagit]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 24/09/2009 04:57, Jason Dagit wrote:
>
>> I ran this more with normal builds and just the GC statistics.  Here is
>> what we see:
>> unmodified darcs:
>> 469 MB total memory in use (3 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>> Total time   26.51s  ( 29.76s elapsed)
>> Productivity  85.6% of total user, 76.2% of total elapsed
>>
>> 469 MB total memory in use (3 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>> Total time   26.59s  ( 32.47s elapsed)
>> Productivity  85.6% of total user, 70.1% of total elapsed
>>
>> 469 MB total memory in use (3 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>> Total time   26.54s  ( 29.95s elapsed)
>> Productivity  85.5% of total user, 75.8% of total elapsed
>>
>> With my patch applied:
>> 554 MB total memory in use (4 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>> Total time   23.30s  ( 31.56s elapsed)
>> Productivity  83.1% of total user, 61.3% of total elapsed
>>
>> 554 MB total memory in use (4 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>> Total time   22.85s  ( 26.33s elapsed)
>> Productivity  82.9% of total user, 71.9% of total elapsed
>>
>> 554 MB total memory in use (4 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>> Total time   22.88s  ( 26.38s elapsed)
>> Productivity  82.8% of total user, 71.8% of total elapsed
>>
>> Now that the profiler is disabled the productivity with my changes is
>> less, the run-time is maybe improved by 2-3 seconds, and the memory
>> usage has increased by almost 100 megs.  I can only assume that the
>> profiling is interfering with my results a fair bit.
>>
>
> The profile graphs in your previous message showed a residency of around
> ~30M before your patch, and ~6M after your patch.  Which seems like a
> worthwhile saving.  I presume those graphs were from a different test case?
>  If not, then something very strange is going on.  If they are from a
> different test case, then do the numbers stand up when using the
> non-profiled darcs?
>

Thanks for trying to help me understand the profiling.

My test case has not changed at all.  The only thing I've been changing is
the darcs source code.

Do you have suggestions on determining which strange thing may be happening?

Thanks,
Jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20090925/82e441a3/attachment.htm>