Measure the default worker count, not only the extremes - #16
Merged
Conversation
The speedup table showed 1 and 6 workers, so its headline number was one nobody gets without asking for it, and the default was described in prose as landing "around 3.8x" - an estimate carried over from a different, shorter fetch rather than from the run being described. Measured 4 alongside the other two, all three cold-cache and back to back in one session: 295 s serial, 80 s at four, 51 s at six, or 3.7x and 5.8x. The default is now a row in the table and labelled as the default, and the estimate is gone. The re-run reproduces the previous one closely - serial 295.2 s against 293.6 s, six workers 51.0 s against 51.1 s - which is the reason to trust any of these as properties of the code rather than of the afternoon. Also records that all three returned identical data, which is what makes the comparison mean anything: the fast runs are not fast by doing less. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The speedup table added in #14 showed 1 and 6 workers, so its headline number was one nobody gets without asking for it, and the default was described in prose as landing "around 3.8x" — an estimate carried over from a different, shorter fetch rather than from the run being described.
Measured 4 alongside the other two, all three cold-cache and back to back in one session:
n_workersThe default is now a row in the table and labelled as such, and the estimate is gone.
Why trust these
The re-run reproduces the previous one closely — serial 295.2 s against 293.6 s, six workers 51.0 s against 51.1 s. Two independent cold-cache runs landing within about half a percent is the reason to read these as properties of the code rather than of the afternoon.
All three runs returned
identical()data: same 59 days, same 9,971 rows. That is what makes the comparison mean anything — the fast runs are not fast by doing less.README only (
.Rmdand the knitted.md). No code changes.🤖 Generated with Claude Code