rob_cameron

5 ms·

1.
by rob_cameron 10y ago
Certainly. I dropped an e-mail at the hyperscan account. By the way, if you try out icgrep and use the -DumpASM option, you may notice a very unusual characteristic: the generated code is almost completely dominated by AVX2 instructions!
2.
by rob_cameron 10y ago
Yes, you have icgrep 1.0. The current development version has about the same build process, sorry that it is such a pain. It is available by svn checkout as follows. svn co http://parabix.costar.sfu.ca/svn/icGREP
3.
by rob_cameron 10y ago
We are very interested in tackling the multiple-pattern regular expression problem and will definitely want to use Hyperscan as a comparator. Any help in setting up a study with both patterns and data sets would be most appreciated!
4.
by rob_cameron 10y ago
Are you using icgrep1.0? That may explain it. My reports are from our current development version r5163. cameron@cs-osl-10:~/ripgrep/datadir/subtitles$ perf stat -e instructions:u,cycles:u,branch-misses:u icgrep1.0 -i -c
5.
by rob_cameron 10y ago
Running the same tests on our test machine, I am seeing dramatically different performance results. Our test machine has AVX2, but this can't be the whole story. cameron@cs-osl-10:~/ripgrep/datadir/subtitles$ time rg &
6.
by rob_cameron 10y ago
Nice work. But your story is incomplete if you don't include comparison with icgrep (parabix.costar.sfu.ca). Although icgrep is still an active research project, it is faster in many cases and has broader Unicode support (full Unico
7.
Gigabyte per Second Unicode Regex Search with Icgrep(parabix.costar.sfu.ca)
5 points by rob_cameron 11y ago|0 comments