Am 18.07.2016 um 13:29 schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:
> El 18/07/16 a las 11:48, clipka escribió:
>> I'd be interested to hear from the Linux jockeys how they are faring
>> with in-file macro invocation. I'd expect a similar picture as with
>> Windows, but the "sweet spot" may be around 0.5k worth of code
>> between macro declaration and invocation, since that's the size of
>> the buffer on Unix. Then again, Unix may provide additional buffers
>> for file access -- there must be a reason why POV-Ray's own buffers
>> where chosen that small on the Linux platform.
> 
>   Using Thomas example on my recently installed Ubuntu 16.04:
> 
>   current alpha, inside : 1m20s
>   current alpha, outside: 1m20s
>   previous alpha, inside: 8m11s
>   previous alpha, outside: 12m46
> 
>   Can I just say "wow!"?

I presume the "inside" is still with the random macros residing in
"rand.inc", right?
Remember that under those conditions, that's still mostly a test of the
"outside" macros.

>> One thing seriously worrying me, however, is that the version using
>> cached macros exhibits seriously worse parsing performance on the
>> 2nd and any subsequent runs, taking about 100 seconds instead of 60
>> seconds. Not sure yet what's going on there.
> 
>   Cannot see that here... subsequent runs still take 1m20s.

Note that "subsequent runs" on Windows means the executable isn't
terminated between runs. On Linux, the closest equivalent would be
subsequent frames in an animation.

Post a reply to this message