3 ms·
200gB in 2.5 hours is still only 22mB/s, I feel like I've seen blog posts of people going several orders of magnitude faster than that when the bottleneck is th
by sebstefan 3y ago
200gB in 2.5 hours is still only 22mB/s, I feel like I've seen blog posts of people going several orders of magnitude faster than that when the bottleneck is the sequential read of a big file on an SSD
- xmcqdpt2 3y agoI've written similar code before using absolutely bog standard idiomatic OOP Java. For a single threaded program I'd expect at least 1GB/s before any optimization. Most of the allocations in the loop that aren't the final records objects will get erased by JIT. They are doing something very wrong.
- sebstefan 3y agoLet me rephrase this for you They're doing something slightly wrong that's making a non-bottleneck part of their code less optimal than it should be.
- Kwpolska 3y agoMillibytes per second?
- sebstefan 3y agoSee in french we don't even have the possibility for that kind of confusion because we named a "byte" an "octet" which also reflects its relation with the number 8 That way they don't get gigabytes and gigabits abbreviated with the same letters and we don't have to rely on a capitalization convention Join the enlightened gigaoctet convention