groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keegan Witt <keeganw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Suggestions for performance improvement
Date Sat, 11 Jul 2015 02:26:27 GMT
Actually, I started thinking: I introduced the reverse problem Rahul had --
I mixed statically compiled code into the dynamic test.  That's why the
difference between static and dynamic Groovy wasn't that substantial.  My
last commit fixes that, with these results

                             user  system      cpu     real

JApplication.java             405       0      405      431
JApplication.groovy           639       0      639      651
Application.java          1088350      20  1088370  1144546
Application.javaStatic     707835      15   707850   895170
Application.groovy        2333817      38  2333855  2492637
Application.groovyStatic   736772      11   736783   857732

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Owen Rubel <orubel@gmail.com> wrote:

> now thats a more realistic benchmark.
>
> Owen Rubel
> 415-971-0976
> orubel@gmail.com
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Keegan Witt <keeganwitt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Rahul,
>> One issue is that your GroovyStatic test is mixing statically compiled
>> and non-statically compiled clases.  I changed the GroovyPlain classes to
>> be compiled statically, and the results went from
>>
>>                              user  system      cpu     real
>>
>> JApplication.java             433       0      433      433
>> JApplication.groovy           646       0      646      655
>> Application.java           963173   18907   982080  1131540
>> Application.javaStatic     750500      14   750514   853262
>> Application.groovy        2541527      41  2541568  2607827
>> Application.groovyStatic  2006609      30  2006639  2049778
>>
>> to
>>
>>                              user  system      cpu     real
>>
>> JApplication.java             411       0      411      411
>> JApplication.groovy           561       0      561      585
>> Application.java          1021404      21  1021425  1097055
>> Application.javaStatic     759105      15   759120   826062
>> Application.groovy         922849      17   922866  1088130
>> Application.groovyStatic   762211       3   762214   822157
>>
>> I experienced the Gradle issue as well.  I'm too tired to think right now
>> if there's a workaround, but in the mean time GMavenPlus works just fine.
>> You can see my changes on my fork: https://github.com/keeganwitt/perfcomp
>>
>> -Keegan
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Rahul Somasunderam <
>> rsomasunderam@transcendinsights.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Here's a project i've setup to run some tests -
>>> https://github.com/rahulsom/perfcomp
>>> The code is based on Mr Haki's
>>> http://mrhaki.blogspot.com/2009/09/groovy-goodness-multimethods-or.html
>>>
>>>  This is the result of running my tests
>>>
>>>  Environment
>>> ===========
>>> * Groovy: 2.4.3
>>> * JVM: Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (25.31-b07, Oracle Corporation)
>>>     * JRE: 1.8.0_31
>>>     * Total Memory: 123 MB
>>>     * Maximum Memory: 1820.5 MB
>>> * OS: Mac OS X (10.9.5, x86_64)
>>>
>>>  Options
>>> =======
>>> * Warm Up: Auto (- 60 sec)
>>> * CPU Time Measurement: On
>>>
>>>                              user  system     cpu    real
>>>
>>>  JApplication.java             13       0      13      13
>>> JApplication.groovy           94       0      94     100
>>> Application.java          426181    1584  427765  429254
>>> Application.javaStatic    288418     918  289336  290410
>>> Application.groovy        832317    2360  834677  837481
>>> Application.groovyStatic  687717    2024  689741  697543
>>>
>>>  It looks like when Java executes the code, it's several orders of
>>> magnitude faster. Is there an option I can try tuning to improve groovy's
>>> odds in this comparison?
>>> I could get IDEA to run my Application.groovy. I couldn't get gradle to
>>> do that, possibly because there's java code depending on groovy code and
>>> groovy code depending on java code. Please ignore that if you want to play
>>> with the project.
>>>
>>>  Appreciate any help/advice.
>>>
>>>  R,
>>> rahul
>>>
>>>
>>> *Rahul Somasunderam *
>>>
>>> *Engineer, Transcend Insights *
>>>
>>>
>>> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
>>> which it is addressed
>>> and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this
>>> material/information in error,
>>> please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.
>>>
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message