On 8/5/2012 5:31 PM, Barton Willis wrote:
> Using the re-arrangement code:
>
> took 214,214,000 microseconds (214.214000 seconds) to run.
> 18,728,831 microseconds ( 18.728832 seconds, 8.74%) of which was spent in GC.
>
> Without:
>
> took 217,601,000 microseconds (217.601000 seconds) to run.
> 17,750,023 microseconds ( 17.750025 seconds, 8.16%) of which was spent in GC.
>
> This is about a 1.6% speed up---I only tried the test once.
>
>
The re-arrangement should not have affected the garbage collection at
all. Your test suggests it
slowed it down! If we factor out the GC time, it seems the
rearrangement was even more effective.
Thanks for trying it out.
RJF