Performance improvement in PropXPlusYEqZ #1178
Conversation
|
Do you observe any performance improvement ? |
|
For PropAbsolute, using removeInterval instead of removeValue enables to double the nb nodes per second |
| for (int v = -val; v <= val; v = Y.nextValue(v)) { | ||
| Y.removeValue(v, this, lcg() ? Reason.r(X.getValLit()) : Reason.undef()); | ||
| if (val >= 0) { | ||
| Y.removeInterval(-val, val, lcg() ? Reason.r(X.getValLit()) : Reason.undef()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
removeInterval is not compatible with lcg.
| for (int v = 1 - min; v <= min - 1; v = Y.nextValue(v)) { | ||
| Y.removeValue(v, this, lcg() ? Reason.r(X.getMinLit()) : Reason.undef()); | ||
| if (1 - min <= min -1) { | ||
| Y.removeInterval(1 - min, min - 1, lcg() ? Reason.r(X.getMinLit()) : Reason.undef()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
same here.
We should either accept not to use removeInterval or use it only when LCg is disabled
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think calling System.gc() is useless.
Did you see any differences ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was just hoping it would be sufficient to solve the out of memory error in the github instance (it wasn't).
| X.instantiateTo(Math.abs(Y.getValue()), this, lcg() ? Reason.r(Y.getValLit()) : Reason.undef()); | ||
| setPassive(); | ||
| } else if (Y.hasEnumeratedDomain()) { | ||
| } else if (Y.hasUnfixedEnumeratedDomain()) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The condition seems correct but I think a little comment would help here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will move back to the original condition actually
No description provided.