You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@mahout.apache.org by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> on 2009/06/23 23:32:03 UTC

SparseVector.optimizeTimes static

What's that boolean all about?  When would I not want the faster  
one?  ;-)

Re: SparseVector.optimizeTimes static

Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.

Consider it done.


On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:36 PM, Sean Owen wrote:

> I agree, let's pull it. I think it was stuck in by whoever was testing
> the change (sorry, forgot who did) to see before/after performance and
> behavior. But yeah, we're good to go with the faster code as far as I
> am concerned.
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Grant  
> Ingersoll<gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>> What's that boolean all about?  When would I not want the faster  
>> one?  ;-)
>>

Re: SparseVector.optimizeTimes static

Posted by Jeff Eastman <jd...@windwardsolutions.com>.

Ha, yes, it was me. I figured it would go soon as the value of the 
faster code was demonstrated.


Sean Owen wrote:
> I agree, let's pull it. I think it was stuck in by whoever was testing
> the change (sorry, forgot who did) to see before/after performance and
> behavior. But yeah, we're good to go with the faster code as far as I
> am concerned.
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Grant Ingersoll<gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>   
>> What's that boolean all about?  When would I not want the faster one?  ;-)
>>
>>     
>
>
>

Re: SparseVector.optimizeTimes static

Posted by Sean Owen <sr...@gmail.com>.

I agree, let's pull it. I think it was stuck in by whoever was testing
the change (sorry, forgot who did) to see before/after performance and
behavior. But yeah, we're good to go with the faster code as far as I
am concerned.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Grant Ingersoll<gs...@apache.org> wrote:
> What's that boolean all about?  When would I not want the faster one?  ;-)
>