-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 323
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Magnitudes slower up_to.each loop on latest GraalVM #7821
Comments
The slowness is related to following warning:
not sure why it doesn't pick the compiler up? My GraalVM has been built with:
|
Yes the slowness is caused by the optimizing truffle runtime not being enabled. Can you print the Java command line ´./built-distribution/enso-engine-0.0.0-dev-linux-amd64/enso-0.0.0-dev/bin/enso` is running underneath? |
At the end following Java command is executed: enso$ java -jar \
-Dtruffle.class.path.append=./built-distribution/enso-engine-0.0.0-dev-linux-amd64/enso-0.0.0-dev/bin/../component/runtime.jar \
-Dgraal.PrintGraph=Network ./built-distribution/enso-engine-0.0.0-dev-linux-amd64/enso-0.0.0-dev/bin/../component/runner.jar \
--run t.enso |
I don't think this is recent.
has been notoriously slow for a really long time. |
My next guess would be that you are not building with a labs JDK here:
My guess is that JVMCI is not enabled by default there. Can you try: https://github.com/graalvm/labs-openjdk-21/releases/tag/jvmci-23.1-b15 instead?
|
I went the easy path and built the GraalVM as:
then Enso works correctly, becomes subject to PE and runs fast. |
btw. maybe we should try to set some kind of time limit on this test and fail it if it's too slow? We've been doing something like that in a few places and it has worked relatively well - we sometimes get spurious failures, but they are rather rare. enso/test/Table_Tests/src/In_Memory/Join_Performance_Spec.enso Lines 10 to 32 in 42a8567
|
Interesting comments by Christian on the future options of packaging Enso:
For now we can stay with |
I am not talking about 2s, but about minutes. Try:
Or divide the number of iteration by hundred? Or remove the test altogether - we are supposed to have benchmarks for such operations (and I believe we do have them). Sorry for the false panic, I was surprised the test doesn't finish and thought there is some endless loop there. Only the further investigation revealed it is just incorrectly built GraalVM without PE compiler. |
As part of working on #6966 I tried to use the latest GraalVM. When running
test/Tests
I realized one test is taking ages. Turns out that:is running magnitudes slower than on currently used GraalVM. Probably
RepeatingNode
doesn't get inlined.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: