From: James Sutherland (James.Sutherland_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-14 17:27:01
>> Okay, then I am interpreting things correctly, and my internal timer
>> seems to be consistent with the output of the "time" command that you
>> refer to. To restate, the sum of "real" and "system" time is the
>> pertinent measure. The results you posted then indicate that there
>> no speedup associated with increasing the number of threads. I am
>> seeing the same thing...
> No, the "real" time is the pertinent measure. I'm saying the
> program took
> 4.991s to complete with 2 threads and 9.668s to complete with 1
> thread. You
> might be less confused if you increase the number of loops in
> operator() so
> the program is slow enough you can measure the execution time by
> watching a
Thank you for your patience with me. I am now understanding this
correctly. I did not realize that the clock() function would double-
count in multithreaded applications.
I took your suggestion of increasing the loop count and that clarified
it for me. It appears that I do have scalability after all...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk