The story of a faulty benchmark
I confess: I didn’t really speed up Go by 20%. However, if you were to believe simplistic arguments, I did.
It all started when a comment on Hacker News claimed that Java is faster than Go and pointed to those benchmarks as proof.
Indeed, every Go benchmark there is 2x to 10x slower than Java 7 program.
That seemed wrong to me - Go compiles to native code. Java, ultimately, does too, but compilation happens at runtime, which is an overhead that Go doesn’t have, so in principle Go should be faster.
I took a look at Go implementation. I’m not an expert in implementing reverse-complement algorithm but I immediately noticed that the code does a lot of unnecessary memory allocations and copying.
I looked at Java implementation and what do you know: it’s implemented more efficiently, without unnecessary memory allocations and copying. Plus it parallelizes the computation.
I wrote my own Go implementation, more similar to Java’s.
The result? On my Mac Pro I got about 20% speedup.
The argument of HN commenter was: look at those benchmarks, Go is 2x slower than Java.
It’s a simplistic but unfortunately powerful argument: most people won’t take the time to look at the code to determine that part of the issue is that Java implementation is simply better than Go one.
By that simplistic argument I’ve improved speed of Go by 20% by writing a slightly better implementation of the benchmark.
The story doesn’t end here. The above results were for single core x86 machine. If you look at results for single-core 64-bit machine, Go actually wins on this and 2 other benchmarks.
The explanation is simple: 64-bit Go compiler is a little bit smarter than 32-bit Go compiler.
Is Go really slower than Java?
There is no simplistic answer to this, but there are rules of thumb.
On equivalent programs, Go generates programs similar in speed or faster. 64-bit version will be slightly better than 32-bit version.
Java garbage collector is much better than Go’s which explains why allocation-heavy benchmarks (e.g. binary-trees) perform so much better (there’s almost no computation there, just allocation of a lot of tree nodes).
Those benchmarks aren’t currently representative of Go performance - from cursory look it seems that C++ and Java implementations are extremely optimized and Go implementations aren’t (I’ve submitted my improved version, hopefully it’ll get incorporated).
Go is already competitive with Java and will only get better. Let’s not forget that Java had over 20 years of investments in code generation and garbage collection. Go is only 5 years old. There already were compiler and garbage collection improvements since the latest released version.
One area where Go wins undeniably is memory usage - the programs use at least order of magnitude less memory. Java is paying the cost of sophisticated virtual machine.
|« Hiding duplicate content from your site via robots.txt||•||Websites with free ePub and mobi ebooks »|