You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've been talking with @reiddraper about the performance issues you ran into when trying to parallelise LSC.
He mentioned that while parMap may not have been suitable, perhaps a happy medium (not as much speedup in the good cases but not the very bad slowdown in the bad) could be reached with evalBuffer which allows you to chunk a list 'n' at a time for parallel reduction.
Any thoughts?
P.S. I wanted to link to the relevant line and be hip but since you've written much of your code in literate Haskell I can't do that. That seems to be a flaw in the way github deals with line numbers, and a flaw with you for being different and using .lhs ;)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Jose Calderon [email protected]
wrote:
I've been talking with @reiddraper about the performance issues you ran into when trying to parallelise LSC.
He mentioned that while parMap may not have been suitable, perhaps a happy medium (not as much speedup in the good cases but not the very bad slowdown in the bad) could be reached with evalBuffer which allows you to chunk a list 'n' at a time for parallel reduction.
Any thoughts?
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #10
I've been talking with @reiddraper about the performance issues you ran into when trying to parallelise LSC.
He mentioned that while parMap may not have been suitable, perhaps a happy medium (not as much speedup in the good cases but not the very bad slowdown in the bad) could be reached with
evalBuffer
which allows you to chunk a list 'n' at a time for parallel reduction.Any thoughts?
P.S. I wanted to link to the relevant line and be hip but since you've written much of your code in literate Haskell I can't do that. That seems to be a flaw in the way github deals with line numbers, and a flaw with you for being different and using .lhs ;)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: