Regarding PrioQueue
Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Skilgannon/KDTree
← Thread:User talk:Skilgannon/KDTree/Regarding PrioQueue/reply (9)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
← Thread:User talk:Skilgannon/KDTree/Regarding PrioQueue/reply (9)
Because of how Java runs the JIT and GC in separate threads, I just tried a couple quick things:
If I force Java to run on only one core, I get this result:
- #1 Skilgannon's Cache-hit KDTree [0.0334] - #2 Rednaxela's kd-tree (3rd gen) [0.0343] - #3 Rednaxela's kd-tree (2nd gen) [0.0375] - #4 Voidious' Linear search [0.5844]
If I force Java to run on two cores, I get this result:
- #1 Rednaxela's kd-tree (3rd gen) [0.0280] - #2 Skilgannon's Cache-hit KDTree [0.0304] - #3 Rednaxela's kd-tree (2nd gen) [0.0341] - #4 Voidious' Linear search [0.4806]
Compared to allowing all 6 cores, only allowing 2 cores improved the linear search result (more dramatic than I expected!), but it hurt all of the kd-trees still.
Maybe that's why my linear search score is so much better than yours?
BTW, newest code is a little bit faster.
Skilgannon (talk)
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:
You can view and copy the source of this page.
Return to Thread:User talk:Skilgannon/KDTree/Regarding PrioQueue/reply (11).