ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | Download File
/cvs/AnyEvent/lib/AnyEvent.pm
(Generate patch)

Comparing AnyEvent/lib/AnyEvent.pm (file contents):
Revision 1.73 by root, Fri Apr 25 07:47:12 2008 UTC vs.
Revision 1.75 by root, Fri Apr 25 07:49:39 2008 UTC

899I<destroy> is the time, in microseconds, that it takes to destroy a single 899I<destroy> is the time, in microseconds, that it takes to destroy a single
900watcher. 900watcher.
901 901
902=head2 Results 902=head2 Results
903 903
904 name watcher bytes create invoke destroy comment 904 name watchers bytes create invoke destroy comment
905 EV/EV 400000 244 0.56 0.46 0.31 EV native interface 905 EV/EV 400000 244 0.56 0.46 0.31 EV native interface
906 EV/Any 100000 610 3.52 0.91 0.75 EV + AnyEvent watchers 906 EV/Any 100000 610 3.52 0.91 0.75 EV + AnyEvent watchers
907 CoroEV/Any 100000 610 3.49 0.92 0.75 coroutines + Coro::Signal 907 CoroEV/Any 100000 610 3.49 0.92 0.75 coroutines + Coro::Signal
908 Perl/Any 16000 654 4.64 1.22 0.77 pure perl implementation 908 Perl/Any 16000 654 4.64 1.22 0.77 pure perl implementation
909 Event/Event 16000 523 28.05 21.38 0.86 Event native interface 909 Event/Event 16000 523 28.05 21.38 0.86 Event native interface
910 Event/Any 16000 943 34.43 20.48 1.39 Event + AnyEvent watchers 910 Event/Any 16000 943 34.43 20.48 1.39 Event + AnyEvent watchers
911 Glib/Any 16000 1357 96.99 12.55 55.51 quadratic behaviour 911 Glib/Any 16000 1357 96.99 12.55 55.51 quadratic behaviour
912 Tk/Any 2000 1855 27.01 66.61 14.03 SEGV with >> 2000 watchers 912 Tk/Any 2000 1855 27.01 66.61 14.03 SEGV with >> 2000 watchers
913 POE/Event 2000 6644 108.15 768.19 14.33 via POE::Loop::Event 913 POE/Event 2000 6644 108.15 768.19 14.33 via POE::Loop::Event
914 POE/Select 2000 6343 94.69 807.65 562.69 via POE::Loop::Select 914 POE/Select 2000 6343 94.69 807.65 562.69 via POE::Loop::Select
915 915
916=head2 Discussion 916=head2 Discussion
917 917
918The benchmark does I<not> measure scalability of the event loop very 918The benchmark does I<not> measure scalability of the event loop very
919well. For example, a select-based event loop (such as the pure perl one) 919well. For example, a select-based event loop (such as the pure perl one)
948The C<Tk> adaptor works relatively well. The fact that it crashes with 948The C<Tk> adaptor works relatively well. The fact that it crashes with
949more than 2000 watchers is a big setback, however, as correctness takes 949more than 2000 watchers is a big setback, however, as correctness takes
950precedence over speed. Nevertheless, its performance is surprising, as the 950precedence over speed. Nevertheless, its performance is surprising, as the
951file descriptor is dup()ed for each watcher. This shows that the dup() 951file descriptor is dup()ed for each watcher. This shows that the dup()
952employed by some adaptors is not a big performance issue (it does incur a 952employed by some adaptors is not a big performance issue (it does incur a
953hidden memory cost inside the kernel, though). 953hidden memory cost inside the kernel, though, that is not reflected in the
954figures above).
954 955
955C<POE>, regardless of underlying event loop (wether using its pure perl 956C<POE>, regardless of underlying event loop (wether using its pure perl
956select-based backend or the Event module) shows abysmal performance and 957select-based backend or the Event module) shows abysmal performance and
957memory usage: Watchers use almost 30 times as much memory as EV watchers, 958memory usage: Watchers use almost 30 times as much memory as EV watchers,
958and 10 times as much memory as both Event or EV via AnyEvent. Watcher 959and 10 times as much memory as both Event or EV via AnyEvent. Watcher

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines