Date: | Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:59:30 -0500 |
---|---|
From: | Dan Gibson <degibson@xxxxxxxx> |
Subject: | Re: [Gems-users] 答复: Average packet latency VS. Ruby cycles |
A colleague (Alaa Alemeldeen) reminded me of Amdahl's law just now -- to quote Puzak: "Everyone knows Amdahl's Law, but quickly forgets it" In other words, my suggested #2 probably isn't feasible. Your workload would have to be *really* network-bound to see that kind of speedup for a 7% reduction in average packet latency, even with multiple traversals. You should really look into whether some timing transient is occurring causing one execution to take a different dynamic path. Regards, Dan 2010/8/25 fubinzhang <fubinzhang@xxxxxxxxx>
-- http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~gibson [esc]:wq! |
[← Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread→] |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [Gems-users] Are there any design documents for Ruby?, Dan Gibson |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [Gems-users] warmup caches in opal only, Miray Kas |
Previous by Thread: | [Gems-users] 答复: Average packet latency VS. Ruby cycles, fubinzhang |
Next by Thread: | [Gems-users] 答复: 答复: Average packet latency VS. Ruby cycles, fubinzhang |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] |