Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
Did you try to profile how the changes affect memory usage and performance? I
believe that would help but I'm interested how much it actually affects the
overall performance.
Original comment by netpr...@gmail.com
on 22 Nov 2010 at 10:04
I think that "byte" would be too small for some fields because that only goes
up to 127 and Starcraft's max supply is 200. We could change them to "short",
but I don't know if it would effect performance enough to be worth it.
Original comment by mike.angstadt
on 22 Nov 2010 at 10:23
Original comment by mike.angstadt
on 22 Nov 2010 at 11:13
I tried changing the state variables to shorts which resulted in a 0.5% - 1%
increase in games played. So probably not worth it. Patch attached.
Original comment by nafets...@gmail.com
on 24 Nov 2010 at 7:22
Attachments:
Ran two tests to gauge performance. I didn't notice much of a change either.
==========
Before running each test, I deleted the "etc" directory and restarted Evolution
Chamber to avoid caching or memory issues that might effect performance. Each
test used 1 processor and ran for 20 seconds. The average games played per
second was calculated using code that I added to the application.
Test 1:
Final: 7 Mutas, +1 Flyer Attack
Test 2:
WP0: 6 Zerglings
WP1: 6 Roaches
WP2: 2 Hydralisks
WP3: 3 Overseers
Final: 7 Mutalisks, +1 Flyer Attack
==========
Before the patch (r132):
Test 1: 1634.1942080919769
Test 2: 1886.4467411107323
After the patch:
Test 1: 1648.5778077479133 (~0.8% increase)
Test 2: 1843.5850855350454 (~2% decrease)
Original comment by mike.angstadt
on 3 Dec 2010 at 11:19
Well it's mostly redundant with the new updates now since they'll be accessing
the array.
Original comment by nafets...@gmail.com
on 3 Dec 2010 at 11:36
No longer valid due to architecture changes in the code base.
Thanks for the patch - it's still appreciated.
Original comment by netpr...@gmail.com
on 20 Jul 2011 at 7:38
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
nafets...@gmail.com
on 22 Nov 2010 at 8:02