From dev-return-8713-apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive=stdcxx.apache.org@stdcxx.apache.org Sun Sep 16 18:38:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F0DC9D55E for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:38:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 41455 invoked by uid 500); 16 Sep 2012 18:38:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-stdcxx-dev-archive@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 41427 invoked by uid 500); 16 Sep 2012 18:38:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@stdcxx.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@stdcxx.apache.org Received: (qmail 41418 invoked by uid 99); 16 Sep 2012 18:38:57 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:38:57 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.34.174.152] (HELO hates.ms) (64.34.174.152) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:38:48 +0000 Received: from [2.128.155.12] (unknown [206.197.31.227]) by hates.ms (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24C8A45C1B2 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2012 18:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50561CA2.5020203@hates.ms> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 14:38:26 -0400 From: Liviu Nicoara User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org Subject: Re: STDCXX-1056 [was: Re: STDCXX forks] References: <40394653-8FCC-4D04-A108-2C650AF8F95B@hates.ms> <5049016D.8000902@gmail.com> <504E2440.1060706@gmail.com> <504FE7F9.90102@gmail.com> <504FF10E.8020506@hates.ms> <50508849.4070708@hates.ms> <50547C22.1000604@hates.ms> <5054EAB7.5050609@hates.ms> <5055EE63.6090004@hates.ms> In-Reply-To: <5055EE63.6090004@hates.ms> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/16/12 11:21 AM, Liviu Nicoara wrote: > On 9/16/12 3:20 AM, Stefan Teleman wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote: >> >>> Now, to clear the confusion I created: the timing numbers I posted in the >>> attachment stdcxx-1056-timings.tgz to STDCXX-1066 (09/11/2012) showed that a >>> perfectly forwarding, no caching public interface (exemplified by a changed >>> grouping) performs better than the current implementation. It was that test >>> case that I hoped you could time, perhaps on SPARC, in both MT and ST >>> builds. The t.cpp program is for MT, s.cpp for ST. >> >> I got your patch, and have tested it. > > Thanks, Stefan. I looked over it and it seems very similar to, and somewhat more > detailed than gprof profiling output. > > I am going to update the incident shortly with a more detailed timing > measurements on my side, in the form of a new attachment. Just FYI in case you > still don't get notifications. I have attached a new set of results to the incident, in the form of the archive: http://tinyurl.com/9drzg4e Please see the content for a description of the library changes (_numpunct.h file), the MT test program (t.cpp) and the results collected through two separate builds on two different machines (results.txt file). Thanks. Liviu