No change. I think made a small script that spends a large amount of
time in java.lang.reflect.Array.setInt too:
(set! *warn-on-reflection* true)
(time
(dotimes [_ 10000]
(let [#^ints arr (int-array 200)]
(dotimes [i 200]
(aset-int arr i i)))))
So maybe I should try to see what I can do about other functions.
On Mar 31, 11:04 pm, David Nolen <[email protected]> wrote:
> 15.1% 0 + 1711 java.lang.reflect.Array.setInt
> Is definitely pointing at the aset-int as being the time gobbler, I think
> the expression in the macro should be this
>
> (aset-int (ints arr#) i# (int (~mask-fn (. buf# (~get-fn)))))
>
> to be extra safe.
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Vincent Foley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I tried it just now; it made no difference. Nevertheless, thank you
> > for you help and time!
>
> > On Mar 31, 9:38 pm, David Nolen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Did you try
> > > (int (mask8 (. buf__2572__auto__ (get))))
>
> > > ?
>
> > > Your macro should like this:
>
> > > (defmacro make-reader
> > > [get-fn mask-fn]
> > > `(fn [#^ByteBuffer buf# len#]
> > > (if (= len# 1)
> > > (~mask-fn (. buf# (~get-fn)))
> > > (let [#^"[I" arr# (int-array len#)]
> > > (dotimes [i# len#]
> > > (aset-int arr# i# (int (~mask-fn (. buf# (~get-fn))))))
> > > arr#))))
>
> > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Vincent Foley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I tried surrounding the call to the (. buf# (get)) method and putting
> > > > the coercion directly inside the mask8 and mask16 functions. Neither
> > > > worked. I want to mention at this point that I have *warn-on-
> > > > reflection* set to true for the little script that uses the library
> > > > and it doesn't report any call to methods that it can't resolve.
>
> > > > Here's the complete -Xprof output, if it helps.
>
> > > > Flat profile of 176.10 secs (11351 total ticks): main
>
> > > > Interpreted + native Method
> > > > 4.5% 511 + 0 java.lang.Integer.hashCode
> > > > 1.4% 160 + 0 java.lang.Integer.intValue
> > > > 0.8% 91 + 0 starcraft.replay.unpack
> > > > $decode_command_block__94.invoke
> > > > 0.7% 80 + 0 clojure.lang.Numbers.int_array
> > > > 0.2% 25 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentVector.pushTail
> > > > 0.1% 15 + 2 java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1
> > > > 0.1% 16 + 0
> > > > hu.belicza.andras.bwhf.control.BinReplayUnpacker.esi28
> > > > 0.1% 4 + 11 clojure.core__init.load
> > > > 0.1% 10 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentVector.cons
> > > > 0.1% 8 + 0 starcraft.replay.actions$fn__71.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 8 + 0
> > > > hu.belicza.andras.bwhf.control.BinReplayUnpacker.unpackSection
> > > > 0.1% 0 + 7 java.lang.reflect.Array.setInt
> > > > 0.1% 7 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentHashMap
> > > > $BitmapIndexedNode.create
> > > > 0.1% 7 + 0 clojure.lang.RestFn.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 7 + 0 clojure.lang.RestFn.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 7 + 0 starcraft.replay.unpack
> > > > $decode_commands__99.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 7 + 0 starcraft.replay.parse
> > > > $parse_buffer__53$fn__56.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 6 + 0 clojure.lang.AFn.applyToHelper
> > > > 0.1% 6 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentArrayMap.assoc
> > > > 0.1% 6 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentHashMap
> > > > $BitmapIndexedNode.assoc
> > > > 0.0% 0 + 5 java.lang.reflect.Array.newArray
> > > > 0.0% 0 + 5 java.lang.Class.forName0
> > > > 0.0% 0 + 5 java.util.zip.Inflater.inflateBytes
> > > > 0.0% 5 + 0 java.lang.AbstractStringBuilder.<init>
> > > > 0.0% 5 + 0 java.util.Arrays.copyOfRange
> > > > 10.9% 1157 + 76 Total interpreted (including elided)
>
> > > > Compiled + native Method
> > > > 10.4% 1183 + 1 starcraft.replay.parse$fn__23$fn__49.invoke
> > > > 10.0% 1123 + 17 starcraft.replay.unpack
> > > > $decode_command_block__94.invoke
> > > > 9.2% 1043 + 0 clojure.core$next__3096.invoke
> > > > 8.9% 1014 + 0 starcraft.replay.parse
> > > > $parse_buffer__53$fn__56.invoke
> > > > 5.5% 626 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentArrayMap.assoc
> > > > 4.3% 474 + 17 clojure.lang.PersistentArrayMap.assoc
> > > > 4.1% 464 + 7 clojure.lang.RestFn.invoke
> > > > 2.9% 333 + 0 clojure.lang.Cons.next
> > > > 2.5% 288 + 0 clojure.lang.RT.seq
> > > > 2.4% 269 + 0 clojure.lang.AFn.applyToHelper
> > > > 2.2% 249 + 0
> > > > hu.belicza.andras.bwhf.control.BinReplayUnpacker.unpackRepChunk
> > > > 1.8% 202 + 0 clojure.core$seq__3112.invoke
> > > > 1.6% 174 + 3 clojure.lang.RestFn.applyTo
> > > > 1.3% 140 + 2 clojure.lang.APersistentMap.cons
> > > > 1.2% 130 + 1 clojure.core$spread__3225.invoke
> > > > 1.1% 127 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentStructMap.valAt
> > > > 0.8% 93 + 0 clojure.core$reduce__3304.invoke
> > > > 0.6% 66 + 2 starcraft.replay.unpack
> > > > $decode_commands__99.invoke
> > > > 0.6% 63 + 0 clojure.lang.PersistentArrayMap.valAt
> > > > 0.1% 13 + 1 clojure.core$conj__3100.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 9 + 0 clojure.lang.APersistentMap.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 3 + 6 starcraft.replay.parse
> > > > $fn__23$read_shorts__37.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 8 + 0 clojure.core$nthnext__4405.invoke
> > > > 0.1% 0 + 7 clojure.lang.ArraySeq.next
> > > > 0.0% 0 + 5 clojure.lang.APersistentVector.assoc
> > > > 72.3% 8126 + 76 Total compiled (including elided)
>
> > > > Stub + native Method
> > > > 15.1% 0 + 1711 java.lang.reflect.Array.setInt
> > > > 1.2% 0 + 135 java.lang.System.arraycopy
> > > > 0.3% 0 + 31 java.lang.reflect.Array.set
> > > > 0.1% 0 + 15 java.io.FileInputStream.readBytes
> > > > 0.1% 0 + 13 java.lang.reflect.Array.get
> > > > 0.1% 0 + 7 java.lang.Object.getClass
> > > > 0.0% 0 + 1 java.lang.Thread.currentThread
> > > > 16.9% 0 + 1913 Total stub
>
> > > > Thread-local ticks:
> > > > 0.0% 1 Class loader
> > > > 0.0% 2 Unknown: no last frame
>
> > > > Flat profile of 0.01 secs (1 total ticks): DestroyJavaVM
>
> > > > Thread-local ticks:
> > > > 100.0% 1 Blocked (of total)
>
> > > > Global summary of 176.12 seconds:
> > > > 100.0% 11603 Received ticks
> > > > 2.1% 246 Received GC ticks
> > > > 4.3% 495 Compilation
> > > > 0.0% 2 Other VM operations
> > > > 0.0% 1 Class loader
> > > > 0.0% 2 Unknown code
> > > > 176.257 secs
>
> > > > On Mar 31, 8:57 pm, David Nolen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Thanks to cl-format:
>
> > > > > (fn
> > > > > [buf__2572__auto__ len__2573__auto__]
> > > > > (if (= len__2573__auto__ 1)
> > > > > (mask8 (. buf__2572__auto__ (get)))
> > > > > (let [arr__2574__auto__ (int-array len__2573__auto__)]
> > > > > (dotimes
> > > > > [i__2575__auto__ len__2573__auto__]
> > > > > (aset-int
> > > > > arr__2574__auto__
> > > > > i__2575__auto__
> > > > > (mask8 (. buf__2572__auto__ (get)))))
> > > > > arr__2574__auto__)))
>
> > > > > This is the expansion for (make-reader get mask8), where were you
> > > > attempting
> > > > > putting the int coercion to to the mask-fn?
>
> > > > > David
>
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Vincent Foley <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > I tried using aset-int and I tried using int to coerce the result
> > of
> > > > > > mask-fn, the input argument to mask-fn and few other things, but
> > none
> > > > > > of that seems to make a difference so far. Mind you, this is an
> > > > > > aspect of Clojure that I find a little confusing, so I'm just
> > putting
> > > > > > int calls here and there and looking at what happens.
>
> > > > > > On Mar 31, 10:46 am, Christophe Grand <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > Did you try to coerce the result of (~mask-fn ...) with int?
> > > > > > > (or use aset-int as suggested by David)
>
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Vincent Foley <[email protected]
>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > No, but in my defense I did not know such a function existed :)
> > > > I'll
> > > > > > > > give it a whirl and report back!
>
> > > > > > > > On Mar 31, 9:57 am, David Nolen <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Did you try using aset-int instead of aset?
>
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Vincent Foley <
> > [email protected]
>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > For those interested, I managed to improve the performance
> > of
> > > > my
> > > > > > > > > > original program from 2 minutes 40 seconds to decode 1000+
> > > > files
> > > > > > down
> > > > > > > > > > to 2 minutes. I'm still far from my goal, but it's an
> > > > improvement,
> > > > > > > > > > especially since the code is shorter and (IMO) cleaner.
> > You
> > > > can
> > > > > > see
> > > > > > > > > > it here:
>
> >http://bitbucket.org/gnuvince/clj-starcraft/src/tip/src/starcraft/rep.
> > > > > > > > ..
>
> > > > > > > > > > And here's another question, running the program with
> > -Xprof
> > > > shows
> > > > > > > > > > that nearly 20% of my execution time is spent calling
> > > > > > > > > > java.lang.reflect.Array.set. Is there something wrong with
> > the
> > > > way
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > type hint my array in make-reader?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > > > > > > > Vincent.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Mar 19, 8:12 pm, Vincent Foley <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
>
> > > > > > > > > > > For the past few days, I've been trying, unsuccessfully,
> > to
> > > > make
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > application I wrote faster. A Java program that
> > performs,
> > > > more
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > less, the same task takes 12 seconds (on my machine) to
> > parse
> > > > > > 1000
> > > > > > > > > > > files; my Clojure program takes nearly 3 minutes. This
> > more
> > > > than
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > order of magnitude slower! Using the profiling tools
> > > > available
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
