----- Original Message ----- From: "Edouard A." <edouard@fausse.info> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [threadpool] version 22 with default pool
I also increased the size of the block to 10,000 and performance improved a little bit (to ~ 0.316). If I increase to 100,000, performance go back to ~ 0.331.
Good new, isn't it?
Yes, but there is room for improvement... As long as we don't go four times faster than std::sort, we can do better. ;)
we are alreadt ~3.7 times better. I suspect tbb::parallel_sort doesn't use a std::sort as base algorithm.
The latency + bandwidth test should explain why the slice's size doesn't seem to affect the performances. For the test task I see something like:
for(int count = ::GetTickCount(); count != target; count = ::GetTickCount());
This is a trivial spin to make sure the tasks eat up some CPU for the desired amount of ms.
May be you can do the test, I work on cygwin. Vicente