Re: [boost] Final benchmark graphs for Colony vs std:: containers now available

Subject: Re: [boost] Final benchmark graphs for Colony vs std:: containers now available
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-13 02:30:38

On 13 May 2016 at 07:30, Soul Studios <matt_at_[hidden]> wrote:

Yes as per the graphs, compared to a completely consolidated memory space
> iteration will be slower, but in many cases the time savings in insertion
> and erasure make up for it. Some of the text on that website needs to be
> updated :)
>
> I've implemented a (simple) Concurrent Graph Library, based on ideas (the
>> base structure) borrowed from the LEMON Graph Library, using
>> tbb::concurrent_vector, instead of std::vector. This comes with some
>> limitations as you correctly pointed out. You did give me some good ideas
>> to actually make that CGL better and more flexible. I've read your paper
>> on
>> jump-counting-skipfields, there are some fun ideas in there that I would
>> like to explore as well.
>>
>
I wasn't going on about indexes because of speed concerns regarding
iterators. Node/arc/edge-Id's ARE the indexes into the node/arc vectors.
This (indexes-) idea makes LEMON Graph Library much faster than BGL (it's
also easier to use by the way, no need to read a book). Sure one could
store iterators, but given the iterators' size, this "solution" would make
the whole thing rather cache-unfriendly as compared to just storing
uint32_t's.

degski