I need some help benchmarking SoA vs AoS

[maik klein via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Tuesday, 29 March 2016 at 21:27:15 UTC, ZombineDev wrote:
> On Saturday, 26 March 2016 at 17:43:48 UTC, maik klein wrote:
>> On Saturday, 26 March 2016 at 17:06:39 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>> On 26.03.2016 18:04, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>>> https://gist.github.com/aG0aep6G/a1b87df1ac5930870ffe/revisions
>>>
>>> PS: Those enforces are for a size of 100_000 not 1_000_000, 
>>> because I'm impatient.
>>
>> Thanks, okay that gives me more more reliable results.
>> for 1_000_000
>>
>> benchmarking complete access
>> AoS: 1 sec, 87 ms, 266 μs, and 4 hnsecs
>> SoA: 1 sec, 491 ms, 186 μs, and 6 hnsecs
>> benchmarking partial access
>> AoS: 7 secs, 167 ms, 635 μs, and 8 hnsecs
>> SoA: 1 sec, 20 ms, 573 μs, and 1 hnsec
>>
>> This is sort of what I expected. I will do a few more 
>> benchmarks now. I probably also randomize the inputs.
>
> Can you benchmark my implementation 
> (http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/3de1e18756f8) against yours? It should 
> have roughly the same API, except that mine doesn't support 
> pre-allocation (reserving capacity) - I wanted to keep it 
> minimalistic.
> During access it should have the same performance, however the 
> insertion behavior should be noticeably different. I'm 
> interested to see if one larger allocation on insertion would 
> be faster than a number of small ones (or vice-versa). Though, 
> AoS should be the fastest in this regard (growth performance).

Yes I'll do it tomorrow, though I am not sure how much you can 
rely on the data. I think it really depends on how fragmented the 
heap currently is.

I will also benchmark memory access, just to see if there is any 
difference. I recently asked a question about it on SO 
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36296960/pros-and-cons-of-one-big-buffer-vs-many-smaller-buffer?

Doesn't seem to be well received though.