Closed Bystroushaak closed 5 years ago
Test results for the ._cached_lookup() with regular arrays:
._cached_lookup()
3824,843478 task-clock (msec) # 0,995 CPUs utilized 10 context-switches # 0,003 K/sec 0 cpu-migrations # 0,000 K/sec 2 043 page-faults # 0,534 K/sec 13 729 623 632 cycles # 3,590 GHz 33 070 608 837 instructions # 2,41 insn per cycle 6 537 429 722 branches # 1709,202 M/sec 10 218 895 branch-misses # 0,16% of all branches 3,844055222 seconds time elapsed
Test results for the ._cached_lookup() with TwoPointerArray:
TwoPointerArray
3585,062567 task-clock (msec) # 0,995 CPUs utilized 16 context-switches # 0,004 K/sec 1 cpu-migrations # 0,000 K/sec 2 061 page-faults # 0,575 K/sec 12 697 148 014 cycles # 3,542 GHz 29 448 353 316 instructions # 2,32 insn per cycle 5 853 911 883 branches # 1632,862 M/sec 9 148 133 branch-misses # 0,16% of all branches 3,604639268 seconds time elapsed
Conclusion: TwoPointerArray is indeed faster (3G5 instructions per benchmark).
Test results for the
._cached_lookup()
with regular arrays:Test results for the
._cached_lookup()
withTwoPointerArray
:Conclusion:
TwoPointerArray
is indeed faster (3G5 instructions per benchmark).