Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

randomascii.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 509 posts

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#491

Post by p0nce »

frozenport wrote: post #404
p0nce wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So: a C++ competitor shall beat it in every dimension you've choosen, until then it's futile to complain about the shortcomings of C++. This doesn't sounds very logical, only like a case of sampling bias.

Unfortunately some projects have an "everything" requirement. That is to say the software must be fast, and written in a way that interface close to the metal. We need to do a lot of parallel processing. Now it's C++ or Rust. Then we need a GUI, and CUDA so we're down to C++. That's why project uses C++.

It's the same old C++ rhetoric "only C++ can do it". Before it only C could do it, and before it only assembly could do it.

Reasoning starting from conclusions to lead to initial constraints is backwards reasoning. For example you don't talk about maintenance or productivity, and yet you end up making a choice without factoring this. Chances are, the choice in most codebases is made because of existing code and culture, not because of rational reasons.

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#492

Post by foobarchu »

pjmlp wrote: post #336
foobarchu wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the rule is attributed to Niklaus Wirth, whose credits include Modula, Modula-2, Oberon, Oberon-2, and Oberon-7. The -* languages are extensions of their originals, so it seems his rule only applies within a single edition of the language. They can add new things, because they are new languages. The justification, then, seems to be that if you legitimately need new features, then the language has failed and you…

Given that Oberon-7 is a subset of Oberon, reducing it to the essential of a type safe systems programming language, I wouldn't consider it an extension. :) There is also Active Oberon and Component Pascal, but he wasn't directly involved.

My mistake, I'm not intimately familiar with it. From what I can tell, Modula-2 and Oberon-2 were both extensions, though, to be used as successors to the previous language.

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#493

Post by frozenport »

p0nce wrote: post #491
frozenport wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately some projects have an "everything" requirement. That is to say the software must be fast, and written in a way that interface close to the metal. We need to do a lot of parallel processing. Now it's C++ or Rust. Then we need a GUI, and CUDA so we're down to C++. That's why project uses C++.

It's the same old C++ rhetoric "only C++ can do it". Before it only C could do it, and before it only assembly could do it. Reasoning starting from conclusions to lead to initial constraints is backwards reasoning. For example you don't talk about maintenance or productivity, and yet you end up making a choice without factoring this. Chances are, the choice in most codebases is made because of existing code and cultu…

No its in there. For example, a similar OSS software called MicroManager is a veritable cluster duck with half the code base dedicated to interfacing between C++ and Java. It doesn't hit the performance spec. The real problem I've had with C++ is finding devs, typically senior C++ software engineer at $130k vs junior Python dev at $70k.

But from the engineering side it's the only "everything" language. (There aren't any good GUI kits for C, and NVCC is C++)

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#494

Post by lobo_tuerto »

I have a new Ryzen 7 CPU (you know, 8 cores, 16 threads), with 64GB RAM and for HDD a Samsung 960 PRO M.2 drive.

But when I went and plugged in an external Seagate 4TB drive, and tried to "dd zero" the s#it out of it, my whole system became unresponsive after a while, obviously I had to reset the machine as it wouldn't "kill -9" the process that made the system unresponsive.

Trying to type was a no go as keys would sometimes become "stuck". Moving the mouse around was an exercise in predictability too.

All this happened in the latest Ubuntu 17.04 64bit... #sadstory

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#495

Post by gorkonsine »

kbart wrote: post #163
elorant wrote: post #49

We've come to the point where building the browser from scratch takes more than building the OS itself.

"We've come to the point where building the browser from scratch takes more than building the OS itself." It doesn't. It took ~5h to build a tiny (~150 MB) complete system (Linux kernel + Yocto based "OS") from sources on 4 core PC few years ago. With modern CPU, I guess, it might be 3h or so. On the side note, the build process generated >50GB of files.

Honestly, Yocto is a complete mess and a terrible embedded OS system IMO. Buildroot is far better, and takes far less time to build.

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#496

Post by Yttrill »

pjmlp wrote: post #272
ableal wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bjarne's made the mistake of having C++ rely on C's linker model, so it meant no modules. > Now we can see it as a big mistake, but on those days probably it was one of the reasons why C++'s adoption took off. No mistake, just no choice - the original (1986 or so) C++ cfront compiled C++ to C which it fed to the C compiler and linker chain.

> "but on those days probably it was one of the reasons why C++'s adoption took off." It is a mistake with 2017 eyes, because build times are now insupportable. Of course it was the right decision in 1986 when trying to get adoption inside AT&T. Also I have read "Design and Evolution of C++" back when it was published, and know C++ since Turbo C++ 1.0 for MS-DOS, so I grew with the language. Which is also a reason wh…

Modules would be very hard to make work in C++, there's way too much entanglement at all levels. Of course the rot actually started with the ANSI C committee when it introduced typedef and broke context free parsing. C++ just compounds this kind of problem with template lookup stupidity. Its what you get when languages are designed by people with no understanding of basic computer science.

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#497

Post by codygman »

treehau5 wrote: post #380
wbl wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GC performance is a trade between throughput and pause time. There are tricks you could play with each tab in its own heap which is entirely discarded on page change, but I think it would take something expensive like Azure to really work.

> GC performance is a trade between throughput and pause time. Go has sub-millisecond GC pauses, and even at that minimizes the need to do stop-the-world pauses (previous HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12821586 ) I think it would be a very interesting exercise to give a crack at it. If anyone is interested, let me know.

> Go has sub-millisecond GC pauses

At the cost of throughput:

> Go optimises for pause times as the expense of throughput to such an extent that it seems willing to slow down your program by almost any amount in order to get even just slightly faster pauses. - https://blog.plan99.net/modern-garbage-collection-911ef4f8bd...

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#498

Post by frankzinger »

phaedrus wrote: post #298
titzer wrote: post #45

Full disclosure: I work for Google on Chrome. A Chrome build is truly a computational load to be reckoned with. Without the distributed build, a from-scratch build of Chrome will take at least 30 minutes on a Macbook Pro--maybe an hour(!). TBH I don't remember toughing out a full build without resorting to goma. Even on a hefty workstation, a full build is a go-for-lunch kind of interruption. It will absolutely own a…

Yes, you're doing it wrong. The trick is you've got to reduce your "saturation level" of #includes in header files, by preferring forward declarations over #includes, and using the PIMPL pattern to move your classes' implementations into isolated files, so that transitive dependencies of dependencies don't all get recursively #included in. When it comes to templates, one has to be very aggressive in asking "Does this…

> Yes, you're doing it wrong.

Your comment is great but I have spent enough time working on Chromium to know that they have people working on the build who know all of this stuff and much more. They understand the build from the top to the bottom of the toolchain stack. (@evmar used to be one of these people and he actually commented in this thread at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14736611.) I am sure your parent commenter is a great developer but I get the impression he/she is not one of the Chromium build people.

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#499

Post by koffiezet »

ComodoHacker wrote: post #157

I remember every other book on Windows programming saying "Process creation/destruction is expensive, use thread pools (or at least process pools) instead, that's the way to go on Windows". Perhaps this mindset is ingrained for Windows QA team too - they don't have [enough] test cases for such scenarios.

This is probably also why Cygwin and even the WSL subsystem in general are a lot slower when running more complex shell scripts, which is typically spawns tons of processes.

I wrote a pretty simple shell script to test WSL process spawn speed, which loops over a simple echo piped to a grep, and add 1 to a counter until it reaches 1000.

On my windows machine, in a Linux VM, I consistently get times like this:

  real    0m1.381s
  user    0m0.073s
  sys     0m1.472s
On the same machine in WSL, I get results like this consistently:

  real    0m14.878s
  user    0m0.469s
  sys     0m12.109s
That is 10 times slower... I don't have cygwin installed anymore, but when I tested it initially when trying out WSL, it was even slower...

Re: 24-core CPU and I can’t move my mouse

#500

Post by p0nce »

frozenport wrote: post #493
p0nce wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same old C++ rhetoric "only C++ can do it". Before it only C could do it, and before it only assembly could do it. Reasoning starting from conclusions to lead to initial constraints is backwards reasoning. For example you don't talk about maintenance or productivity, and yet you end up making a choice without factoring this. Chances are, the choice in most codebases is made because of existing code and cultu…

No its in there. For example, a similar OSS software called MicroManager is a veritable cluster duck with half the code base dedicated to interfacing between C++ and Java. It doesn't hit the performance spec. The real problem I've had with C++ is finding devs, typically senior C++ software engineer at $130k vs junior Python dev at $70k. But from the engineering side it's the only "everything" language. (There aren't…

Well, it's true that they aren't good UI toolkits in D either (let's say as good as Qt). For me it works as the "everything" language, I also wrote CUDA bindings once (obviously that wouldn't work with mixed host/gpu code which I hope no one really use).
Post reply on HN