harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver Deakin <oliver.dea...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] New ICU release
Date Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:40:53 GMT
Hi Aleksey,

Thanks for performance testing the changes. It's great that the Dacapo 
benchmark has not been affected by this change, but I agree that the 
small SPEC degradation is a concern. However, I would argue that we 
should still upgrade to the new version. At this point I value bug fixes 
and stability over performance, and IMHO moving to a proper release 
version of icu4j is preferable to using the current mid development 
cycle build we have in SVN, even if there is a slight degradation in one 
of the benchmarks.

I would personally suggest that we still move to the new version of 
icu4j after M4 and address the performance issues as an ongoing task 
with the ICU developers.

Regards,
Oliver

Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> Hi, Oliver!
>
> This change:
>  a. does not affect composite Dacapo performance
>  b. degrades SPECjbb2005 performance for 1-2%.
>
> Taking (b) into the account, I would like to vote for deferring
> immediate moving to ICU 3.8.1. We can revisit this one more time if
> there's a way to beat the degradation.
>
> Thanks,
> Aleksey.
>
> On Dec 14, 2007 3:53 PM, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Thanks for offering to help Aleksey, that's great!
>>
>> Ive opened HARMONY-5313 and attached a script and a patch to be applied.
>> Please run the script before applying the patch, as one file needs to be
>> moved before it is patched. Once it's applied, if you run the
>> fetch-depends target you should see that the new ICU4J jars are
>> downloaded. Then if you just rebuild you should be ready to run with the
>> new version.
>>
>> Thanks for the help!
>> Oliver
>>
>>
>> Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>     
>>> Thanks, Oliver!
>>>
>>> Performance data on microtests is looking good, however I wonder what
>>> impact it has on DRLVM and large benchmarks. Haven't you filed JIRA
>>> for this issue? If I'll have exact steps to build configuration with
>>> new ICU, I could check it's performance before committing the changes
>>> to the trunk.
>>>
>>> Aleksey.
>>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2007 8:08 PM, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Thanks Aleksey.
>>>>
>>>> I have run the JUnit tests with the IBM VME and they pass without any
>>>> new failures. I have also run the encoding/decoding test in HARMONY-3709
>>>> a number of times - in general, ICU4J 3.8.1 performs in that test as
>>>> well or slightly better than the ICU4J 3.8 jar we are currently using. I
>>>> have attached the results of the latest run I made [1].
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Oliver
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> DECODING:
>>>> Small Input:
>>>>   Decoding: GB18030 , 1000000 times
>>>>   Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 890.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 593.0
>>>> Small Input:
>>>>   Decoding: ISO-8859-1 , 1000000 times
>>>>   Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 328.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 328.0
>>>> Small Input:
>>>>   Decoding: UTF-8 , 1000000 times
>>>>   Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 344.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 360.0
>>>> Large Input:
>>>>   Decoding: GB18030 , 1000 times
>>>>   Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 2110.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 1968.0
>>>> Large Input:
>>>>   Decoding: ISO-8859-1 , 1000 times
>>>>   Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 157.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 156.0
>>>> Large Input:
>>>>   Decoding: UTF-8 , 1000 times
>>>>   Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 735.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 719.0
>>>>
>>>> ENCODING:
>>>> Small Input:
>>>>   Encoding: GB18030 , 1000000 times
>>>>  Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 969.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 1063.0
>>>> Small Input:
>>>>   Encoding: ISO-8859-1 , 1000000 times
>>>>  Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 344.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 344.0
>>>> Small Input:
>>>>   Encoding: UTF-8 , 1000000 times
>>>>  Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 359.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 359.0
>>>> Large Input:
>>>>   Encoding: GB18030 , 1000 times
>>>>  Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 7407.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 7297.0
>>>> Large Input:
>>>>   Encoding: ISO-8859-1 , 1000 times
>>>>  Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 219.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 219.0
>>>> Large Input:
>>>>   Encoding: UTF-8 , 1000 times
>>>>  Current ICU4J Milliseconds: 625.0
>>>>   ICU4J 3.8.1 Milliseconds: 610.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Good news, Oliver!
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, basing on our previous experiences with ICU changes, we might
>>>>> first try how Harmony performs with new ICU onboard before making this
>>>>> change default. That's not only JUnit and other validation suites, but
>>>>> performance too (say, Dacapo and other benchmarks performance).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Aleksey.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 13, 2007 2:53 PM, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>>> ICU 3.8.1 has just been released, so Id like to propose that after
M4 we
>>>>>> upgrade to this release, add it to the fetch-depends target and remove
>>>>>> the "homemade" ICU4J jar we have stored in SVN.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Im running the tests with the new version now to make sure there
are no
>>>>>> regressions and will be happy to make the required changes when the
time
>>>>>> comes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Objections?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Oliver
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Oliver Deakin
>>>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
number 741598.
>>>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
PO6 3AU
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Oliver Deakin
>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>       
>> --
>>
>> Oliver Deakin
>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>>
>>
>>     
>
>   

-- 
Oliver Deakin
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


Mime
View raw message