tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post8911551364075907594..comments2010-10-14T15:19:48.769+03:00Nikos Dimitrakopouloshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04393123772459226701noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post-90489787104605845992008-04-30T00:59:00.000+03:002008-04-30T00:59:00.000+03:00Hey there.<BR/><BR/>No need to be disheartened.<BR/><BR/>The Rubinius team is entirely focused on correctness, not on speed.<BR/><BR/>Even so, in the last 6 months, times for real world applications have gone from ~1200x slower to ~30x slower.<BR/><BR/>The entire goal of Rubinius, at this point, is to make a very well architected and *tested* Ruby implementation, written largely in Ruby, that can really grow quickly, particularly with respect to community involvement.<BR/><BR/>Once we feel we have a complete implementation, speed will be job 1.<BR/><BR/>At this point, any optimization would really be premature optimization. It's *far* more important to focus on architecture and testability, and that's exactly what we are focusing on.tmornini@engineyard.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16586612177824788816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post-59526631332911451662008-04-26T16:41:00.000+03:002008-04-26T16:41:00.000+03:00<I>@anonymous: I don't think "begs the question" means what you think it means....</I><BR/><BR/>Really...please, tell me what it means...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post-66550183875877326192008-04-26T14:49:00.000+03:002008-04-26T14:49:00.000+03:00@anonymous: I don't think "begs the question" means what you think it means....<BR/><BR/>But agreed; disheartening. Though on the positive side, this particular test may be hitting one specific but small part of rubinius that needs serious optimization (but which they haven't focused on yet because it's not part of their test suite, or it's not often used intensively, etc. etc..<BR/><BR/>So sometimes it's possible that a very small change can completely change the results for a benchmark like this one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post-42777494662088279582008-04-25T19:24:00.000+03:002008-04-25T19:24:00.000+03:00This begs the question...how many years will it before before rubinius (the only really interesting vm) can perform well enough for production use? These results are disheartening...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post-32193617297594416752008-04-17T00:52:00.000+03:002008-04-17T00:52:00.000+03:00Yes, i know (now) after getting some feedback from the jruby people. First of all I have the 1.5 JVM and i run the code without any flags. I'm going to update the post with all the details (and also use benchmark instead of time).NikosDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04393123772459226701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1767470000639394516.post-43477294313945582982008-04-17T00:48:00.000+03:002008-04-17T00:48:00.000+03:00Weird. For me, jruby with -J-server is consistently faster than Ruby 1.8.6 (45secs vs 53 secs on PC1/Linux and 28secs vs 40 secs on PC2/Windows).Vladimir Sizikovhttp://blog.emptyway.comnoreply@blogger.com