mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Futex
Date Thu, 23 Nov 2017 19:11:36 GMT
Is there a claim of a mutex bottleneck in mxnet? I am not aware of any,
unless someone knows otherwise.

Database engines tend to be collision-happy, but mxnet does not seem to be
as far as I know, unless someone knows differently.


On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Bhavin Thaker <bhavinthaker@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Do we have performance/profiling measurement evidence to prove/disprove the
> claims of the impact of mutex bottleneck in MXNet?
>
> Bhavin Thaker.
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:03 AM Tianqi Chen <tqchen@cs.washington.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > If they are not bottleneck. Then resorting to standard library solution
> is
> > always preferred
> >
> > Tianqi
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Chris Olivier <cjolivier01@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Was doing some timing with futexes (we used them a lot in a previous
> life
> > > in database engines) and they're consistently about 20-30% faster than
> > > standard mutexes in Linux.
> > >
> > > However, it seems like this is not worth making a change since mutexes
> > > don't tend to get called so much that it would seem to make a
> noticeable
> > > difference, although I could be wrong -- so far besides the queue, I am
> > not
> > > aware of any major bottlenecks on mutexes.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > -Chris
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message