<quote>
> First, the regular R 1.9. It takes 2 minutes and 6 seconds, CPU usage
> 50%
>
> Next, REvolution's R. It takes 2 minutes and 10 seconds, CPU usage 100%.
>
> In other words, REvolution's R consumes double the CPU with slightly
> less speed.
The fact that it is the same time with only the 50%/100% makes me think
this is an artifact of the CPU indicator. Try to assign only one CPU to
the REvolution task. Wild guess: also 2 minutes plus minus
Dieter
</quote>
Yeah, I don't think CPU indicators mean a lot. I've watched the CPU
chart in Activity Monitor (OS X) go to 200% -- and that's on a machine
that does not have dual processors or dual-core processors.
OTOH, I'd have to disagree with the folks who suggest REvolution might
have a lot of set-up overhead. Unless the example code from the OP has
a lot of full start/stop behavior, it's hard to imagine some code that
is zippy fast but has a set-up time in the double-digit seconds range.
And that's what would be needed for the times quoted above if REvolution
were to be processing twice as fast as R.
Carl
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
