Changes between Version 16 and Version 17 of assign+


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Aug 7, 2013 3:32:00 PM (7 years ago)
Author:
sunshine
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • assign+

    v16 v17  
    7676|| ''assign'' failed, ''assign+'' succeeded, ''assign'' failed with fixed nodes from ''assign+'' || 1 || 0.01% || This happens because ''assign'' cannot properly deal with fixed interfaces. I checked quite a few of these solutions manually and they are possible solutions. ||
    7777
    78 == Performance ==
     78== Performance Results ==
    7979
    8080[[Image(time.jpg)]]
     81
     82The image above shows the ratio of time taken by ''assign+'' vs ''assign'' on y axis vs time taken by ''assign+'' on x axis. Values of y smaller than 1 are better. We can see that the ratio varies a lot for short times, e.g., under 10 seconds. Sometimes ''assign'' is better and sometimes ''assign+''. As we go to more complex topologies that take longer to allocate ''assign+'' becomes decidedly better, often taking 1/10 of the time that ''assign'' needs. In the extreme this is 1 minute for ''assign+'' vs 10 minutes for ''assign''.
     83
     84
     85
    8186[[Image(nodes.jpg)]]
    8287[[Image(isw.jpg)]]