【发布时间】:2015-07-25 05:39:29
【问题描述】:
我正在探索基于约束的搜索的自动边界。因此,我的出发点是SEND MORE MONEY problem,带有solution based on nondeterministic selection without replacement。我修改了计算执行样本数的方法,以便更好地衡量向搜索添加约束的影响。
import Control.Monad.State
import Control.Monad.Trans.List
import Control.Monad.Morph
import Data.List (foldl')
type CS a b = StateT [a] (ListT (State Int)) b
select' :: [a] -> [(a, [a])]
select' [] = []
select' (x:xs) = (x, xs) : [(y, x:ys) | ~(y, ys) <- select' xs]
select :: CS a a
select = do
i <- lift . lift $ get
xs <- get
lift . lift . put $! i + length xs
hoist (ListT . return) (StateT select')
runCS :: CS a b -> [a] -> ([b], Int)
runCS a xs = flip runState 0 . runListT $ evalStateT a xs
fromDigits :: [Int] -> Int
fromDigits = foldl' (\x y -> 10 * x + y) 0
sendMoreMoney :: ([(Int, Int, Int)], Int)
sendMoreMoney = flip runCS [0..9] $ do
[s,e,n,d,m,o,r,y] <- replicateM 8 select
let send = fromDigits [s,e,n,d]
more = fromDigits [m,o,r,e]
money = fromDigits [m,o,n,e,y]
guard $ s /= 0 && m /= 0 && send + more == money
return (send, more, money)
main :: IO ()
main = print sendMoreMoney
它可以工作,得到正确的结果,并且在搜索过程中保持平坦的堆配置文件。但即便如此,它还是很慢。这比不计算选择要慢 20 倍。甚至那个也不可怕。为了收集这些性能数据,我可以忍受支付巨额罚款。
但我还是不希望性能变得不必要的糟糕,所以我决定在性能方面寻找低调的果实。当我这样做时,我遇到了一些令人费解的结果。
$ ghc -O2 -Wall -fforce-recomp -rtsopts statefulbacktrack.hs
[1 of 1] Compiling Main ( statefulbacktrack.hs, statefulbacktrack.o )
Linking statefulbacktrack ...
$ time ./statefulbacktrack
([(9567,1085,10652)],2606500)
real 0m6.960s
user 0m3.880s
sys 0m2.968s
那个系统时间太荒谬了。程序执行一次输出。这一切都去哪儿了?我的下一步是检查strace。
$ strace -cf ./statefulbacktrack
([(9567,1085,10652)],2606500)
% time seconds usecs/call calls errors syscall
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
98.38 0.033798 1469 23 munmap
1.08 0.000370 0 21273 rt_sigprocmask
0.26 0.000090 0 10638 clock_gettime
0.21 0.000073 0 10638 getrusage
0.07 0.000023 4 6 mprotect
0.00 0.000000 0 8 read
0.00 0.000000 0 1 write
0.00 0.000000 0 144 134 open
0.00 0.000000 0 10 close
0.00 0.000000 0 1 execve
0.00 0.000000 0 9 9 access
0.00 0.000000 0 3 brk
0.00 0.000000 0 1 ioctl
0.00 0.000000 0 847 sigreturn
0.00 0.000000 0 1 uname
0.00 0.000000 0 1 select
0.00 0.000000 0 13 rt_sigaction
0.00 0.000000 0 1 getrlimit
0.00 0.000000 0 387 mmap2
0.00 0.000000 0 16 15 stat64
0.00 0.000000 0 10 fstat64
0.00 0.000000 0 1 1 futex
0.00 0.000000 0 1 set_thread_area
0.00 0.000000 0 1 set_tid_address
0.00 0.000000 0 1 timer_create
0.00 0.000000 0 2 timer_settime
0.00 0.000000 0 1 timer_delete
0.00 0.000000 0 1 set_robust_list
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
100.00 0.034354 44039 159 total
所以..strace 告诉我系统调用只花费了 0.034354 秒。
time 报告的sys 的其余时间去哪儿了?
还有一个数据点:GC 时间真的很长。有没有简单的方法来降低它?
$ ./statefulbacktrack +RTS -s
([(9567,1085,10652)],2606500)
5,541,572,660 bytes allocated in the heap
1,465,208,164 bytes copied during GC
27,317,868 bytes maximum residency (66 sample(s))
635,056 bytes maximum slop
65 MB total memory in use (0 MB lost due to fragmentation)
Tot time (elapsed) Avg pause Max pause
Gen 0 10568 colls, 0 par 1.924s 2.658s 0.0003s 0.0081s
Gen 1 66 colls, 0 par 0.696s 2.226s 0.0337s 0.1059s
INIT time 0.000s ( 0.001s elapsed)
MUT time 1.656s ( 2.279s elapsed)
GC time 2.620s ( 4.884s elapsed)
EXIT time 0.000s ( 0.009s elapsed)
Total time 4.276s ( 7.172s elapsed)
%GC time 61.3% (68.1% elapsed)
Alloc rate 3,346,131,972 bytes per MUT second
Productivity 38.7% of total user, 23.1% of total elapsed
系统信息:
$ ghc --version
The Glorious Glasgow Haskell Compilation System, version 7.10.1
$ uname -a
Linux debian 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.68-1+deb7u1 i686 GNU/Linux
在 Windows 8.1 上托管的 VMWare Player 7.10 中运行 Debian 7 虚拟机。
【问题讨论】:
-
一位朋友报告说在使用 GHC 7.6 的非虚拟化 linux 机器上运行此代码,并在输出中看到
sys 0m0.136s。虚拟化很可能是造成这种情况的根本原因。 -
munmap几乎肯定被垃圾收集器用来管理竞技场。带有复制 GC 的函数式语言不适合在虚拟机上运行。尝试在裸机上运行。
标签: linux performance haskell virtual-machine ghc