4 ms·
Are there any performance benefits over MRI?
by mickallen 6y ago
Are there any performance benefits over MRI?
- jtstanley 6y agoThe talk at rubyconf mentioned that `string.scan` was 100% faster due to specialized string implementations in the Rust backend. I wonder if there are any performance gains from the actual runtime rather than from std optimizations?
- spullara 6y ago100% faster? Does that mean twice as fast or is string.scan now take 0 time?
- ibraheemdev 6y ago100% faster means speed is increased by 100%, i.e. double the speed or half the time. MRI took 89ms/iter to scan for a regex pattern over 6.8MB of text, while Artichoke took 48ms/iter [0] 0: https://youtu.be/QMni48MBqFw?t=1378 https://youtu.be/QMni48MBqFw?t=1378
- jonnytran 6y agoThat is misleading, in my opinion. "100% faster" implies that runtime for a given workload is reduced by 100%, taking zero time. I think what you mean to say is either that it's 50% faster or that throughput is increased by 100%.
- Tistron 6y agoSurely faster means higher speed, and speed is something per time unit, e.g. miles per hour, or number of scans per second. At least for me 100% faster does not mean the same as 100% less time was needed.
- chrisseaton 6y agoI don't think it runs Optcarrot (the current most prominent Ruby benchmark) otherwise it'd be listed here https://github.com/mame/optcarrot https://github.com/mame/optcarrot. It doesn't have a lot of compatibility with standard Ruby yet according to https://eregon.me/blog/2020/06/27/ruby-spec-compatibility-report.html https://eregon.me/blog/2020/06/27/ruby-spec-compatibility-re... which could be why it doesn't run it. But it's a really exciting project!
- hamburglar 6y agoNot sure how far off this is, practically speaking, but "true parallelism with no GIL" would be a pretty damn significant perf achievement.