Stabilise benchmarks wrt. GC
Summary: This is due to #15999, a follow-up on #5793 and #15357.
It changes some benchmarks (i.e. wheel-sieve1
, awards
) rather drastically.
The general plan is outlined in #15999: Identify GC-sensitive benchmarks by looking at how productivity rates change over different nursery sizes and iterate main
of these benchmarks often enough for the non-monotony and discontinuities to go away.
I was paying attention that the benchmarked logic is actually run $n times more often, rather than just benchmarking IO operations printing the result of CAFs.
When I found benchmarks with insignificant runtime (#15357), I made sure that parameters/input files were adjusted so that runtime of the different modes fall within the ranges proposed in https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/15357#comment:4:
- fast: 0.1-0.2s
- norm: 1-2s
- slow: 5-10s
This is what I did:
- Stabilise bernoulli
- Stabilise digits-of-e1
- Stabilise digits-of-e2
- Stabilise gen_regexp
- Adjust running time of integrate
- Adjust running time of kahan
- Stabilise paraffins
- Stabilise primes
- Adjust running time of rfib
- Adjust running time of tak
- Stabilise wheel-sieve1
- Stabilise wheel-sieve2
- Adjust running time of x2n1
- Adjust running time of ansi
- Adjust running time of atom
- Make awards benchmark something other than IO
- Adjust running time of banner
- Stabilise boyer
- Adjust running time of boyer2
- Adjust running time of queens
- Adjust running time of calendar
- Adjust runtime of cichelli
- Stabilise circsim
- Stabilise clausify
- Stabilise constraints with moderate success
- Adjust running time of cryptarithm1
- Adjust running time of cryptarythm2
- Adjust running time of cse
- Adjust running time of eliza
- Adjust running time of exact-reals
- Adjust running time of expert
- Stabilise fft2
- Stabilise fibheaps
- Stabilise fish
- Adjust running time for gcd
- Stabilise comp_lab_zift
- Stabilise event
- Stabilise fft
- Stabilise genfft
- Stabilise ida
- Adjust running time for listcompr
- Adjust running time for listcopy
- Adjust running time of nucleic2
- Attempt to stabilise parstof
- Stabilise sched
- Stabilise solid
- Adjust running time of transform
- Adjust running time of typecheck
- Stabilise wang
- Stabilise wave4main
- Adjust running time of integer
- Adjust running time of knights
- Stabilise lambda
- Stabilise lcss
- Stabilise life
- Stabilise mandel
- Stabilise mandel2
- Adjust running time of mate
- Stabilise minimax
- Adjust running time of multiplier
- Adjust running time of para
- Stabilise power
- Adjust running time of primetest
- Stabilise puzzle with mild success
- Adjust running time for rewrite
- Stabilise simple with mild success
- Stabilise sorting
- Stabilise sphere
- Stabilise treejoin
- Stabilise anna
- Stabilise bspt
- Stabilise cacheprof
- Stablise compress
- Stablise compress2
- Stabilise fem
- Adjust running time of fluid
- Stabilise fulsom
- Stabilise gamteb
- Stabilise gg
- Stabilise grep
- Adjust running time of hidden
- Stabilise hpg
- Stabilise infer
- Stabilise lift
- Stabilise linear
- Attempt to stabilise maillist
- Stabilise mkhprog
- Stabilise parser
- Stabilise pic
- Stabilise prolog
- Attempt to stabilise reptile
- Adjust running time of rsa
- Adjust running time of scs
- Stabilise symalg
- Stabilise veritas
- Stabilise binary-trees
- Adjust running time of fasta
- Adjust running time of k-nucleotide
- Adjust running time of pidigits
- Adjust running time of reverse-complement
- Adjust running time of spectral-norm
- Adjust running time of fannkuch-redux
- Adjust running time for n-body
Problematic benchmarks:
-
last-piece
: Unclear how to stabilise. Runs for 300ms and I can't make up smaller inputs because I don't understand what it does. -
pretty
: It's just much too small to be relevant at all. Maybe we want to get rid of this one? -
scc
: Same aspretty
. The input graph for which SCC analysis is done is much too small and I can't find good directed example graphs on the internet. -
secretary
: Apparently this needs-package random
and consequently hasn't been run for a long time. -
simple
: Same aslast-piece
. Decent runtime (70ms), but it's unstable and I see no way to iterate it ~100 times in fast mode. -
eff
: Every benchmark is problematic here. Not from the point of view of allocations, but because the actual logic is vacuous. IMO, these should be performance tests, not actual benchmarks. Alternatively, write an actual application that makes use of algebraic effects. -
maillist
: Too trivial. It's just String/list manipulation, not representative of any Haskell code we would write today (no use of base library functions which could be fused, uses String instead of Text). It's only 75 loc according tocloc
, that's not areal
application.
Reviewers: simonpj, simonmar, bgamari, AndreasK, osa1, alpmestan, O26 nofib
GHC Trac Issues: #15999
Differential Revision: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D5438