Skip to content
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

restored benches from orig repo with minor refactoring #8

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

vhnatyk
Copy link
Contributor

@vhnatyk vhnatyk commented May 23, 2019

Hi - restored benches from orig repo with minor refactoring (removed duplicated code in gg18 keygen.rs bench) wanted to merge it first but noticed you merged already #6 . Anyway seems from point of performance libsecp256k1 crate is ok anyway - here are some pics with times

your original multi-party-ecdsa by KZen

  • Ubuntu x64 (via VM Ware Player)

64 bit: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu on nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

prior secp256k1 crate (C based)

  • Windows 10 x64

32bit: i686-pc-windows-msvc on nightly-i686-pc-windows-msvc

64 bit: x86_64-pc-windows-msvc on nightly-x86_64-pc-windows-msvc

  • Ubuntu x64 (via VM Ware Player)

64 bit: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu on nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

Now current libsecp256k1 crate (pure Rust)

  • Windows 10 x64

32bit: i686-pc-windows-msvc on nightly-i686-pc-windows-msvc

64 bit: x86_64-pc-windows-msvc on nightly-x86_64-pc-windows-msvc

  • Ubuntu x64 (via VM Ware Player)

64 bit: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu on nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

@vhnatyk vhnatyk mentioned this pull request May 24, 2019
@omershlo
Copy link
Contributor

holy shit - is it possible that moving into pure rust secp made a huge leap in performance ?
In that case I will open an issue on curv to do this replacement.

Can you run test for signing and not just keygen ?
in gg18 signing is much more interesting (and complex)

@vhnatyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

vhnatyk commented May 28, 2019

I wouldn't say huge - though seems a bit significant, closing this pr in favor of #9 that is just continuation on a renamed branch

@vhnatyk vhnatyk closed this May 28, 2019
@vhnatyk vhnatyk deleted the dev/vhnat/benches-i7 branch May 29, 2019 19:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants