Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal: Monotonic Containers - Comparison with boost::pool, boost::fast_pool and TBB
From: Christian Schladetsch (christian.schladetsch_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-22 19:54:29
> Steven> I'm not convinced that the average is meaningful.
It's not, that's why I included the standard deviation and min/max as well.
> boost::fast_pool_allocator is not intended to be used
> with std::vector. You're averaging many cases for
> which it is documented to behave badly with a couple
> of cases for which it is fine.
That's correct. I was asked to compare with boost::pool_allocator,
boost::fast_pool_allocator, std::allocator and tbb::allocator.
> Also, even though pool_allocator
> is supposed to work with std::vector, it is slow as I would
> expect. The pool data structure is really designed for
> fixed size allocations and I for one am not particularly
> enamored of the idea of using it for std::vector.
> Also, this is completely unreleated, but for lines like this
> fast 1.49 0.838 0.603 1.32e+003
> It looks like the cumulative min/max are being used instead of
> the local min/max.
That's also correct and I noticed this as well. I'll change it so that the
test summaries show min/max just for that test, and keep the overall the
> In Christ,
> Steven Watanabe
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk