On 3 November 2010 05:35, Norberto Manzanos <nmanzanos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile, can you run this code and tell what is your numbers?
>>
>
> They are really different.
>
> 1) Yours: 53704.  Mine: 6615

ohh.. i just rerun that code and got different numbers:
 3475
 3160

> 2) Yours: 116307  Mine: 290471
> 3) yours: 263306 mine: 648078

so, i conclude that your image/VM/PC is about 2x times slower than mine.
Still, proportion between numbers are the same.

> Image is Squeak 3.9. Are you testing with 4.1 or Pharo?

4.2 with VM new finalization

> Anyway, these are acceptable numbers too.

yes.

> I think the objects you are adding are excesively simple.
> I have just tried with  objects a little more complex, but results were good
> again.

Yes it should,  of course, slow things down, when you adding bigger
objects, proportional to space they using.
But not by order(s) of magnitude.

> I don't know what to think. There's nothing really different between these
> tests and my real-world objects.
> I'll try to isolate the problem and test it again.
>

Aren't we isolated it already? Unless its very ineffective
MagmaCollectionReader implementation,
the only thing which looking suspicious in your code is following:

session readStrategy: (MaReadStrategy minimumDepth: 0).

> Thanks
>
>
> --
> Norberto Manzanos
> Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (IdIHCS)
> FaHCE/UNLP - CONICET
> Calle 48 e/ 6 y 7 s/Nº - 8º piso - oficina 803
> Tel: +54-221-4230125 interno 262
>
>
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.