Re^4: parallelism v.python

What processor was this run on? (Can I safely assume that you were running in a non-VM environment?)

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^4: parallelism v.python

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: parallelism v.python by perl-diddler (Chaplain) on Mar 14, 2014 at 23:37 UTC
Oops, sorry, missed your Q earlier. Two socket, 6-core X5660 Xeon @ 2.80GHz. I don't know about 'safe' assumptions, but in this case, such an assumption would be correct -- er.. wait, what's a VM again? ;-) I am running a numa-aware kernel, w/default policies, V3.13.5, SMP PREEMPT, 1000Hz clock interrupt in 'tickless mode'.	[reply]
Re^6: parallelism v.python by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Mar 15, 2014 at 00:35 UTC
2 sockets x 6 cores x 2 (hyperthreading) = 24 "processors". Using 9 threads for your benchmark is a really weird choice. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply]