 | | | Benchmarking C++ operators | Benchmarking C++ operators 2004-06-01 - By Guy Rabiller
Back
On factor to enhance the speed of any operator, is to not query the
ports and parameters with string names.
Rather use indexes with GetPortAt and GetParameters.
You might get considerable speed enhancement.
--
guy rabiller | 3d technical director @ LaMaison
Felix Gebhardt wrote:
>Luc-Eric Rousseau wrote:
>
>
>>right, QueryPerformanceCounter is what we
>>use for mesuring an operator's performance.
>>
>>
>
>Now I only need to actually HAVE your operator's performance. But hey, at
>least we use the same timer ;)
>
>Thanks for telling,
>Felix
>
>
>
>
>
>>-- --Original Message-- --
>>From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf
>>Of Felix Gebhardt
>>Posted At: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 10:08 AM
>>Posted To: xsi
>>Conversation: Benchmarking C++ operators
>>Subject: Re: Benchmarking C++ operators
>>
>>
>>Hi Daniel, thanks for helping out,
>>
>>I already had a look at VTune. Like you said. It's way overdosed for my
>>purpose and too expensive to setup. I will have a look at the MSVC option
>>but I also found something interesting on codeproject.
>>http://www.codeproject.com/cpp/precisetimer.asp
>>
>>
>>If there is anything else, keep em coming,
>>Felix
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Daniel Bachler wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Well there is Intels Vtune, but it's quite expensive (although I think
>>>that there is a trial version available) and it can be a bit tough to set
>>>up so that it returns some usefull information. MSVC has some kind of
>>>profiler of its own IIRC, but without any graphical representation or
>>>anything fancy. And, last but not least, you can of course take
>>>timestamps yourself everytime you operator gets called and everytime it
>>>returns and measuring that time. If it's something simple I would first
>>>try the last trick, it's quite fast to setup and very precise, as the
>>>time you loose on profiling is really negligible. If you want to take it
>>>a step further you can store an array of simple structures containing
>>>last starttime and amount of time in that block, then write two small
>>>function, like this: (C++ style pseudocode)
>>>
>>>Void StartBlock(int blockIndex)
>>>{
>>>m_ProfilerStructures[blockIndex].m_Starttime = gettime();
>>>}
>>>
>>>Void EndBlock(int blockIndex)
>>>{
>>>m_ProfilerStructures[blockIndex].m_ElapsedTime += gettime() -
>>>m_ProfilerStructures[blockIndex].m_Startime();
>>>}
>>>
>>>You can then use it like this:
>>>
>>>StartBlock(INIT);
>>>Initialize();
>>>EndBlock(INIT);
>>>StartBlock(MAIN);
>>>DoStruff();
>>>EndBlock(MAIN);
>>>
>>>Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-- --Original Message-- --
>>>>From: owner-xsi@(protected)
>>>>[mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)] On Behalf Of Felix Gebhardt
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 2:22 PM
>>>>To: XSI@(protected)
>>>>Subject: Benchmarking C++ operators
>>>>
>>>>Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>does anyone happen to have an advise on what's the best way
>>>>to benchmark
>>>>compiled operators? In VBS I just would take a time snapshot
>>>>but it's not
>>>>too precise. How to nail it down better in C++? Any simple
>>>>but precise way
>>>>or free and easy to use analyzer/profiler?
>>>>
>>>>Suggestions greatly appreciated,
>>>>Felix
>>>>
>>>>
>>---
>>Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in body:
>>unsubscribe xsi
>>
>>
>
>---
>Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo@(protected) with the following text in body:
>unsubscribe xsi
>
>
>
>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859 (See http://ISO-8859.ora-code.com)-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
On factor to enhance the speed of any operator, is to not query the ports
and parameters with string names.<br>
Rather use indexes with GetPortAt and GetParameters.<br>
You might get considerable speed enhancement.<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol">--
guy rabiller | 3d technical director @ LaMaison</pre>
<br>
<br>
Felix Gebhardt wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid006401c447e9$3ae6c1d0$8202a8c0@(protected)">
<pre wrap="">Luc-Eric Rousseau wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">right, QueryPerformanceCounter is what we
use for mesuring an operator's performance.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Now I only need to actually HAVE your operator's performance. But hey, at
least we use the same timer ;)
Thanks for telling,
Felix
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-- --Original Message-- --
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)"
>owner-xsi@(protected)</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto
:owner-xsi@(protected)">mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)</a>]On Behalf
Of Felix Gebhardt
Posted At: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 10:08 AM
Posted To: xsi
Conversation: Benchmarking C++ operators
Subject: Re: Benchmarking C++ operators
Hi Daniel, thanks for helping out,
I already had a look at VTune. Like you said. It's way overdosed for my
purpose and too expensive to setup. I will have a look at the MSVC option
but I also found something interesting on codeproject.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.codeproject.com/cpp
/precisetimer.asp">http://www.codeproject.com/cpp/precisetimer.asp</a>
If there is anything else, keep em coming,
Felix
Daniel Bachler wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Well there is Intels Vtune, but it's quite expensive
(although I think
that there is a trial version available) and it can be a bit tough to set
up so that it returns some usefull information. MSVC has some kind of
profiler of its own IIRC, but without any graphical representation or
anything fancy. And, last but not least, you can of course take
timestamps yourself everytime you operator gets called and everytime it
returns and measuring that time. If it's something simple I would first
try the last trick, it's quite fast to setup and very precise, as the
time you loose on profiling is really negligible. If you want to take it
a step further you can store an array of simple structures containing
last starttime and amount of time in that block, then write two small
function, like this: (C++ style pseudocode)
Void StartBlock(int blockIndex)
{
m_ProfilerStructures[blockIndex].m_Starttime = gettime();
}
Void EndBlock(int blockIndex)
{
m_ProfilerStructures[blockIndex].m_ElapsedTime += gettime() -
m_ProfilerStructures[blockIndex].m_Startime();
}
You can then use it like this:
StartBlock(INIT);
Initialize();
EndBlock(INIT);
StartBlock(MAIN);
DoStruff();
EndBlock(MAIN);
Daniel
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-- --Original Message-- --
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)"
>owner-xsi@(protected)</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)">mailto
:owner-xsi@(protected)</a>] On Behalf Of Felix Gebhardt
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 2:22 PM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:XSI@(protected)">XSI
@(protected)</a>
Subject: Benchmarking C++ operators
Hi all,
does anyone happen to have an advise on what's the best way
to benchmark
compiled operators? In VBS I just would take a time snapshot
but it's not
too precise. How to nail it down better in C++? Any simple
but precise way
or free and easy to use analyzer/profiler?
Suggestions greatly appreciated,
Felix
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">---
Unsubscribe? Mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Majordomo
@(protected)">Majordomo@(protected)</a> with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
---
Unsubscribe? Mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Majordomo
@(protected)">Majordomo@(protected)</a> with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="$mailwrapcol">
</pre>
<br>
</body>
</html>
|
|
|