flex-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: Workers and Speed
Date Sun, 07 Aug 2016 05:48:50 GMT
Also keep in mind that the new logic runs fewer and fewer tests as you
near the end.  Item1 is compared against all items, but item(N-1) isn't
compared at all since it was already compared by all the previous items.
If your sparse array logic, or some other calculation is expecting more
sparse array entries from the last entries back towards previous entries
then that might throw off the results.

-Alex

On 8/6/16, 4:57 PM, "Javier Guerrero GarcĂ­a" <javi.gg@gmail.com> wrote:

>1. Are you sure the second result set is the wrong one? I mean, could
>those
>9 different results be just duplicates?
>
>2. Did you apply Justin simplification on using Pythagorean distances
>instead of euclidean distances on the second version? 4.000000000001 miles
>is greater than 4.0 miles (and hence discarded), and that could happen for
>a very small number of results (5%).
>
>3. Go back to version 1, change one thing at a time, and check results on
>each change to see if they are both congruent.
>
>On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 11:19 PM, bilbosax <waspence41@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> I probably should quit whining on here about this issue, but sometimes I
>> get
>> so baffled that you just want someone to share in the misery :)
>>
>> So, I have the two different versions of my program.  One that just
>>chugs
>> through all of the numbers in a little over 2 min.  The other calculates
>> half of the distances and writes the data to a sparse array, and then
>> calculates my equations, all in about 1 minute and 40 seconds.
>>
>> I want to use the faster version, but the data sets that I get out of
>>the
>> two programs are just slightly different.  This is where I am baffled.
>>I
>> exported my data to CSV files so that I could compare them in Excel,
>>and in
>> 95% of the records, the two programs calculate exactly all the same
>> answers,
>> all the totals and sums and averages.  But in about 200 of 38K records,
>>it
>> just goes off the rails and finds no objects within the calculated
>> distance,
>> while the original program will find like 9.  It seems to happen more
>> frequently towards the end of the dataset.  But I find this baffling.
>>How
>> does the logic work 95% if the time, and not the other 5%?  I wonder if
>>the
>> sparse array is unstable or unrelieable, but it always returns the exact
>> same, but faulty, data.  Ugh.  End of rant.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-users.
>> 2333346.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13238.html
>> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>

Mime
View raw message