Re: filling area by color atack safety - worst memory size

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:59:20 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>

On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 10:47:25 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>
[...]
>

Finally found the time for speed measurements.  [...]

>
I got these.  Thank you.
>
The format used didn't make it easy to do any automated
processing.  I was able to get around that, although it
would have been nicer if that had been easier.
>
The results you got are radically different than my own,
to the point where I wonder if there is something else
going on.

>
What are your absolute result?
Are they much faster, much slower or similar to mine?
Also it would help if you find out characteristics of your
test hardware.

>
I think trying to look at those wouldn't tell me anything
helpful.  Too many unknowns.  And still no way to test or
measure any changes to the various algorithms.

>
Frankly, I don't understand.
If you have troubles with testing on shared hardware then you can
always test on the hardware that you own and has full control.
Even if it is a little old, the trends tend to be the same.  At
least I clearly see the same trends on my almost 12 y.o.  home PC
and on relatively modern EPYC3.

I have put this problem aside.  It's a lot of work even if I had
a way to make substantive progress, and at present I don't.
Maybe more sometime later but for now I think suspending is the
only workable choice available.