performance - Interpreting ruby's benchmark results: difference between Benchmark.bm and Benchmark.bmbm -


i testing 4 different algorithms in ruby , i"m having trouble interpreting results returned ruby's benchmark utility.

i ran each set of algorithms twice, once using benchmark.bm , again using benchmark.bmbm. here results:

benchmark.bm:

  real   stime  total   utime 1 214.91  3.44  154.93 151.48 2 208.85  3.03  161.37 158.34 3 224.40  3.23  161.63 158.41 4 234.02  3.34  163.49 160.16 

benchmark.bmbm:

   real   stime  total  utime 1 252.61  3.50  163.89 160.39 2 278.56  3.65  164.61 160.96 3 241.89  3.37  162.73 159.36 4 256.12  3.56  163.91 160.35 

which algorithm performs best(1,2,3 or 4) according these results? practical differences between using benchmark.bm , benchmark.bmbm.

apologies if answered elsewhere, couldn't find direct answer.

there don't seem significant differences between algorithms. what's relevant number 'total', total time spent cpu on running code. these pretty close each other.

the difference between benchmark.bm , benchmark.bmbm latter runs benchmark, throws away result, runs again , returns second run's results. reason avoid unfair disadvantage of subjects: possible there exist common resources between subjects 1 of them needs initialize, , bmbm have better chance in 'warm' state , obtain fair result.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

get url and add instance to a model with prefilled foreign key :django admin -

android - Keyboard hides my half of edit-text and button below it even in scroll view -

css - Make div keyboard-scrollable in jQuery Mobile? -