-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Performance regression returning anonymous function from struct #40606
Labels
Comments
KristofferC
added
performance
Must go faster
regression
Regression in behavior compared to a previous version
labels
Apr 26, 2021
seems just as bad or worse now:
|
vtjnash
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 24, 2023
The `aft` parameter is a value already, so we should be checking it in the value domain, not the type domain like `tt`. That check happens to already be done (somewhat unnecessarily) earlier in the function. Fixes #40606
aviatesk
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2023
The `aft` parameter is a value already, so we should be checking it in the value domain, not the type domain like `tt`. That check happens to already be done (somewhat unnecessarily) earlier in the function. Fixes #40606 --------- Co-authored-by: Shuhei Kadowaki <[email protected]>
KristofferC
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 15, 2023
The `aft` parameter is a value already, so we should be checking it in the value domain, not the type domain like `tt`. That check happens to already be done (somewhat unnecessarily) earlier in the function. Fixes #40606 --------- Co-authored-by: Shuhei Kadowaki <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit f24a93a)
nalimilan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 5, 2023
The `aft` parameter is a value already, so we should be checking it in the value domain, not the type domain like `tt`. That check happens to already be done (somewhat unnecessarily) earlier in the function. Fixes #40606 --------- Co-authored-by: Shuhei Kadowaki <[email protected]> (cherry picked from commit f24a93a)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Sorry if the title isn't too clear, I'm not exactly sure what is going on. I experienced a huge performance decrease in a project I'm working on after upgrading to julia 1.6. I posted about it here, and following @KristofferC's advice tried reverting fd8f97e, which solved the problem.
A MWE that shows the problem is
This is an minimal as I could make it. The regression occurs when using the value of
y($M).($x)
(hence the.* 1
). For julia installed from the Arch User Repository the results of the benchmark are:For julia master:
And finally for tag v1.6.0 with commit fd8f97e reverted:
I also tried reverting fd8f97e on master but there was a conflict in the affected code that I could not resolve.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: