From: Jan Hafer (jan.hafer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-04-02 16:43:36
Thanks for the fast reply.
On 01.04.20 16:08, degski wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 05:27, Jan Hafer via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
>> Dear Boost developer,
>> I found the circular buffer to be slower than std::queue for
> These are different containers.
Yes, however I needed a queue and was interested in the performance
Apparently std::queue is slower on single-thread applications,
but faster for multiple threads. I could reproduce the results on my own
circular buffer implementation.
> multithreading except in the case of a single thread (where it is
>> notably faster).
> std::queue is not synchronized.
Yes, I do use 1 buffer/queue per thread.
> I am using resize() to have the expected size filled as in vector.
>> Is this behavior expected or documented anywhere?
>> What kind of speedup is to be expected against the std::queue
>> If there is none, then what is the purpose of circular buffer?
> You could read the relevant docs. I strongly doubt that this boost
> container is slower than anything in the STL when compared like for like.
True, could reproduce.
> I do also have broken code on a multithreaded application that worked
>> fine before. I do pass the circular buffer as reference via functions
>> from file scope, which in combination with the threads (initially
>> starting elsewhere) somehow broke the code.
>> Do you do regular benchmarks against other implementations? I dont see
>> linked graphs on your homepage.
I would like to see the benchmark results against std-implementations
linked on the main page.
If possible, also as simple comparison per thread count.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk