Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't see why all that can't be reflected in dynd type system and array metadata. It's just early and foundations are still being laid.

Revelation julia union etc performance...are these improvents a given, hypothetocal or hope? Doesnt fast code on these types fly kn the face of julia static optimization ethos?

Also serious question: dask's use of fast python datastructures like dictionaries gives it a 1ms per task overhead. Is that slow? How does it compare to other dag frameworks like julia etc



> Doesnt fast code on these types fly [in] the face of julia static optimization ethos?

What does that even mean? Julia's union types aren't intentionally slow, they just aren't implemented very efficiently yet. Major revisions of how they're implemented are definitely on the roadmap, not far away.

For fine-grained parallelism of the type you'd use MPI for, 1ms overhead (assuming that's pure overhead above and beyond the actual cost of data movement) could be significant, sure. If you have calculations that need to go for thousands of individually cheap iterations, it adds up.


It means that I thought Julia wanted to avoid inching too much towards tracing JIT optimization.

Well, luckily dask isn't meant for MPI style parallelism. I was wondering how it compared so something like computeframework.

Good to hear that union type performance will be optimized. Are there any issues I can follow?


A better compiler is a good thing, as long as its performance model can stay reasonably transparent.

https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/8974


Agreed.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: