[gambit-list] threading
Nicolas Hurtubise
nicolas.k.hurtubise at gmail.com
Fri Mar 10 19:07:05 EST 2017
>From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_concurrent_and_parallel_programming_languages#Multi-threaded,
Java, C# and Clojure could all be good candidates.
Nicolas
Le 2017-03-10 à 18:50, Marc Feeley a écrit :
> Now that truly concurrent threading is working fairly well I decided to benchmark Gambit against Python for a simple threaded program (threaded Fibonacci with a thread granularity of roughly 50 microseconds creating 30,000 threads). I was happy to see that Gambit performs well. Here are the timings:
>
> % time gsi -:p4 tfib.scm
>
> real 0m0.355s
> user 0m1.234s
> sys 0m0.041s
>
> % time python3 tfib.py
>
> real 0m3.965s
> user 0m3.326s
> sys 0m1.535s
>
> On 4 processors Gambit has a “user” time that is about 4 times the “real” time, and the system time is almost nil.
>
> But wait a second… the Python system time is huge and the user and real times are roughly the same… after a little bit of research I just recalled the GIL (Global Interpreter Lock) that effectively serializes the execution of the interpreter so only one thread is active at any point in time (when in the interpreter). I can’t believe how such a crapily implemented language can be so popular…
>
> Any suggestions for a popular and efficient threaded language to compare to?
>
> Marc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gambit-list mailing list
> Gambit-list at iro.umontreal.ca
> https://webmail.iro.umontreal.ca/mailman/listinfo/gambit-list
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list