[#37730] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Open] come back gem_prelude! — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>

24 messages 2011/07/02

[#37840] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4985][Open] Add %S[] support for making a list of symbols — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

23 messages 2011/07/07

[#37866] [Backport87 - Feature #4996][Open] About 1.8.7 EOL — Shyouhei Urabe <shyouhei@...>

22 messages 2011/07/08

[#37913] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5003][Open] Enumerator#next segfaults in OS X Lion (10.7) — Ganesh Gunasegaran <ganesh.gunas@...>

16 messages 2011/07/09

[#37917] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5005][Open] Provide convenient access to original methods — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

13 messages 2011/07/09

[#37932] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5008][Open] Equal rights for Hash (like Array, String, Integer, Float) — Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>

31 messages 2011/07/09

[#37936] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5010][Open] Add Slop(-like) in stdlib and deprecate current OptionParser API — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>

29 messages 2011/07/09

[#37968] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5015][Open] method_added" is called in addition to "method_undefined — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

14 messages 2011/07/10

[#38096] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5033][Open] PATCH: 1.9: gc_mark_children: Avoid gc_mark() tail recursion, use goto again. — Kurt Stephens <ks.ruby@...>

14 messages 2011/07/16

[#38109] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5034][Open] C Source Code formatting — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

18 messages 2011/07/16

[#38171] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5047][Open] Segfault (most likely involving require) — Jack Christensen <jack@...>

21 messages 2011/07/18

[#38182] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5054][Open] Compress a sequence of ends — ANDO Yasushi ANDO <andyjpn@...>

68 messages 2011/07/19

[#38197] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056][Open] About 1.9 EOL — Shyouhei Urabe <shyouhei@...>

39 messages 2011/07/19
[#38900] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — Shota Fukumori <sorah@...> 2011/08/10

[#38902] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/08/10

Hi,

[#39048] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2011/08/22

Hi,

[#39055] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2011/08/23

On 23/08/11 at 06:50 +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:

[#38295] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5064][Open] HTTP user-agent class — Eric Hodel <[email protected]>

15 messages 2011/07/21

[#38391] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5076][Open] Mac OS X Lion Support — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>

17 messages 2011/07/22

[#38503] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5096][Open] offer Logger-compatibility for ext — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>

16 messages 2011/07/25

[#38510] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5097][Assigned] Supported platforms of Ruby 1.9.3 — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>

42 messages 2011/07/26

[#38526] [Backport92 - Backport #5099][Open] Backport r31875 load path performance problem — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

19 messages 2011/07/26

[#38538] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5101][Open] allow optional timeout for TCPSocket.new — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>

15 messages 2011/07/27

[#38610] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5120][Open] String#split needs to be logical — Alexey Muranov <muranov@...>

18 messages 2011/07/30

[#38623] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123][Open] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash — Alexey Muranov <muranov@...>

14 messages 2011/07/31

[ruby-core:37824] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Assigned] come back gem_prelude!

From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
Date: 2011-07-06 09:48:58 UTC
List: ruby-core #37824
Hi

Nice improvement!

> Issue #4962 has been updated by Eric Hodel.
>
> Status changed from Open to Assigned
>
> I have made three runs of `make benchmark` using the following revisions =
of ruby:
>
> ruby 1.9.2p180 (2011-02-18 revision 30909) [x86_64-darwin10.8.0]
>
> ruby 1.9.3dev (2011-07-05 trunk 32413) [x86_64-darwin10.8.0]
>
> The benchmark bm_vm_thread_mutex3.rb was disabled as it presented an an e=
xtreme outlier for 1.9.2p180.

Ah, yes. This is the reason why I rewrote GVL. We should ignore it.


> I took the total time it took all benchmarks to run.
>
> The first run is with the ruby checkout
>
> 1.9.2: =A0204.890 206.312 209.319
> 1.9.3: =A0210.793 215.815 214.773
> diff: =A0 5.903 =A0 9.503 =A0 5.454
>
> (For diff, smaller is better)
>
> The second run is with --disable-gems for 1.9.3. =A0I modified RUNRUBY in=
 Makefile:
>
> RUNRUBY =3D $(MINIRUBY) $(srcdir)/tool/runruby.rb --extout=3D$(EXTOUT) $(=
RUNRUBYOPT) -- --disable-gems

I recommend to change $(MINIRUBY) to ./ruby if your 1.9.2 is not
miniruby. It help to avoid
see unrelated benchmark difference. :)


>
> 1.9.2: =A0215.472 206.452 205.110
> 1.9.3: =A0201.837 194.694 191.747
> diff: =A0 -13.635 -11.758 -13.363
>
> The third run is with my changes to delay work in rubygems.rb:
>
> 1.9.2: =A0208.982 211.249 208.637
> 1.9.3: =A0198.714 201.984 198.293
> diff: =A0 -10.268 -9.265 =A0-10.344
>
> Here are the average differences from 1.9.2-p180:
>
> stock ruby trunk: =A0 =A0 =A0 6.953
> --disable-gems: -12.919
> rubygems patches: =A0 =A0 =A0 -9.959
>
> Is the slowdown of 2.96 seconds between --disable-gems and my fixes acros=
s all benchmarks acceptable?
>
> Should I look for additional improvements?

Great!

Can you please tell us a result of vm3_gc and io_file_read? They have
most big degressions
and I'm worry about it.

Anyway, personally I think it is acceptable and no more improvemnt
because usually people only
compare 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 and don't compare individual patches in 1.9.3 chang=
es.

Endoh-san, What do you think?

In This Thread