Fw: Rev 2 Judy status.

[Doug B. <dou...@ya...>]

 
Doug Baskins <dou...@ya...>


----- Forwarded Message -----
>From: Doug Baskins <dou...@ya...>
>To: gwenael chailleu <gwe...@gm...> 
>Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:13 PM
>Subject: Rev 2 Judy status.
> 
>
>Gwen:
>
>
>The new Judy (probably rev 2.0) is going very slowly.  I am having problems debugging it quickly,
>while testing the effects of modifications on speed.   So, I decided to use the 1.0.5 version of Judy
>to try some of the speed fixes.   There is one "fix" to "JudyGet.c" that improves the speed about
>50%.   Some of the others changes require many file changes.   I will make that one "fix" and send
>you the source to try out, if you are interested.  I will incorporate some of the other changes
>in rev 1.0.6 when I know how to use "popc" in Windows and Apple compilers.  Perhaps, I
>will only use it in the 64bit versions (or until Core 2 duo becomes obsolete).
>
>
>
>I only use one SSE instruction in the new Judy so far -- popc (bit counting).   I would be very interested
>to knowwhat other you use to get the %20 speed gain.
>
>
>Thanks for you interest,
>
>
>doug
> 
>Doug Baskins <dou...@ya...>
>
>
>
>>________________________________
>> From: gwenael chailleu <gwe...@gm...>
>>To: Doug Baskins <dou...@ya...> 
>>Sent: Saturday, November 3, 2012 7:42 AM
>>Subject: Re: better thank twice than not at all !
>> 
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>>We open-sourced our gnu m4 extension (using JudyBL built over JudyL) last week and we were wondering how your JudyL recoding was going ?
>>On another matter, we have dowloaded openMalaria, an open source BOINC project in order to optimize it. 
>>We reached à 20 % speed gain only with a few SSE math functions. 
>>Are you thinking of using SIMD instructions in your new version ?
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Gwen
>>
>>
>>
>
>