Sunday, December 18, 2016

Surprising slower CPU speeds with MacBook Pro 2016

First off, the new Macbook Pro is impressively designed and I really like the direction they’re going. The Touchbar makes so much sense and it’s immediately obvious that it’s what the function keys always wanted to be.

However, after comparing between the 2015 model and this latest one, the CPU performance seems surprisingly bad.

Here are the specs for the two laptops I've tested:

2015 MacBook:
  • 2.8 ghz i7 (quad core; burst 4.0 ghz; Haswell)
  • 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM



2016 MacBook:
- 2.7 ghz i7 (quad core; burst 3.6 ghz; Skylake)
- 16 GB  2133 MHz LPDDR3 RAM

A good portion of my day includes compiling Scala code, a language which, due to it's extensive feature set, can take a little longer to compile. As such I'm inclined to care about how well the hardware I'm using performs this task. In a somewhat informal test, I compiled the Marathon code 4 times, from scratch, each time completely clearing the compile cache (and not re-downloading dependencies). On average, the compile times were as follows:

  • MacBook Pro 2015 : 2m18s
  • MacBook Pro 2016 : 2m33s

This represents about a 12% reduction in performance from the 2015 to the 2016 model. The base clock speed is 4% slower, and the burst clock speed is 10% slower. The RAM in the 2016 model is significantly faster. So, to see this bit of a hit on performance was a surprise to me. In related news, clock speeds don't mean anything anymore.

On the positive side, the touch ID, touch bar, brighter screen, smaller form, new speakers, etc. are fantastic. It’s a very well designed device and it's a joy to use. When I'm browsing the web or performing other non-CPU-intensive tasks, the newer 2016 MacBook Pro is up to the task and has no noticeable performance issues. But, when measuring CPU intensive tasks, alone, it's strange how poorly it performs compares to it’s predecessor. It makes me wonder if maybe there is a software issue, or the MacBook Pro I received is defective, or, perhaps, they made some compromises to how CPU overclocking is handled because the new form factor introduced additional heat distribution constraints.

At any rate, if you regularly run CPU intensive tasks as a part of your day, then you may wish to pass on the new MacBook Pro, for now.

--- UPDATE ---

When I first wrote this post, I was consistently seeing a 27% decrease in speed. However, when I came back to run watch the clock speeds throughout the process, I wasn't able to reproduce those numbers. I've updated the post as such. I'm a little confused as to why it was performing so much worse earlier, but am also relieved.

I ran the Intel Power Gadget to monitor clock-speeds throughout the compile process. It looks like the newer MacBook Pro 2106 runs cooler and use SIGNIFICANTLY less power, which is what you'd expect from the new Skylake processors. Also, it appears to be bursting much less aggressively than the 2015 model, which explains perhaps the larger performance gap.


MacBook Pro 2015 CPU activity during compilation process. 


MacBook Pro 2016 CPU activity during compilation process.

I turned the MacBook Pro 2016 fans on high (using iStat menus) and it kept the CPU at just under 70°C the whole time during the compile test; no difference in execution time. I wonder why the new MacBook Pro doesn't push the processor harder when temperature is low and electrons are abundant?

Sunday, July 19, 2015

The Need for Acknowledgement in Streams

While working on op-rabbit Akka Streams integration, I had the need to know when a piece of data had completed its flight through a stream, where completion could be defined as the following:

  • The source element was processed by the sink.
  • The element was eliminated by a filter, mapConcat -> 0, or collect.
  • In the case an element was split into multiple sub-elements via mapConcat, all resulting sub-elements were completed.
  • In the case many elements were grouped together via grouped, groupedWithin, etc., the resulting group completed.
  • In the case an element is broadcast over n channels, then similarly, all resulting copies of the element were handled, and their downstream results.

Error signaling is important, too. If an element fails in any give stage of the stream, then the error should be propagated up through the acknowledgement channel.

My original implementation of this idea was to simply create a stream whose contents were always a tuple of a Promise and the element. Then, it would be the responsibility of the programmer working with the stream to handle acknowledgements. However, this approach ran counter to the philosophy of "model valid states using the type system"; it was too easy to make a mistake and not fork a promise, collect promises together, or altogether not acknowledge the promise (because it was carelessly filtered from the stream). Also, mixing the concern of acknowledgement with the concern of processing the stream produced some tremendously difficult-to-read code, even with a special helper. An example:


As you can see, it reads awful. And, worse, it's still incredibly error prone.

I wrestled with this: is acknowledgment needed? Without acknowledgement, then there is no hope for retrying messages that failed because of simple chaos. If the process crashes, or the stream is not brought down gracefully, then the messages in-flight are lost. In most cases, this is probably acceptable. But, in others, it's not. I wanted to see if I could do better.

At first, I decided it would be best to create a new class of stream components, based on Akka Streams, called AckedSource, AckedFlow, and AckedSink. The justification is as follows:

  • The requirement of automatic message acknowledgement necessarily implies a reduced set of out-of-the-box operations at your disposal. For example, it is inherently impossible, from the outside, to correlate messages emitted via scan and transform operations with the upstream elements that went into producing that output.
  • It would be too easy to accidentally hook an AckedStream to a normal Akka Streams Sink, or a normal Akka Streams Flow. This would result in leaky acknowledgement. Without a separate class of streams, the compiler would not know to yell at you for making this mistake.
  • Modeling message acknowledgement from head-to-tail provides similar watertight properties as does Future. A Scala Future, when constructed via a thunk, must complete, or must error. The only way to make a Future not complete is to complete it with another Future that doesn't complete (one that was created via a Promise), or actually have it run forever (in which case, never completing is the appropriate course of action). Because you cannot run an AckedSource or AckedFlow until it's connected into an AckedSink, and all stream operations are restricted to those that can guarantee watertight acknowledgement, it is impossible to have an element be processed and not acknowledged (or, "nacked" due to an error). Of course, this is operating on the assumption that AckedSource, AckedFlow and AckedSink do their job correctly.

Here is the above code modified to use AckedStream


All of the original functionality was retained, and the code is much simpler, easier to read. Naturally, the complexity is pushed elsewhere (to AckedStream), but that's just good separation of concerns.

FanOut / FanIn Graphs

AckedSource, AckedFlow, and AckedSink are a good start; but how do we handle the more complex 1-n or n-1 element routing scenarios provided by Akka Streams FlowGraph? There is a lot of rich functionality here, allowing composable disconnected stream fragments to be assembled into a closed graph.

Again, I considered, "do we press this pattern onward? Or, do we opt for generic types? Are we pressing it too far and creating too much complexity?" I was divided: proceeding seemed risky, and I could end up with significant lost time and, afterward, a terrible mess of complexity worse the original problem. I convinced myself it was worth it for the following reasons:

  • The provided Akka Stream Broadcast component is incompatible with message acknowledgement; combining an AckedSource with this component would be an error.
  • Combining an AckedSource to an Akka Flow or Sink is also an error.
  • In an Akka FlowGraph, when you combine a Source with a Flow, you get a FlowGraph.Implicits
    PortOps
    . PortOps implements FlowOps and provides stream manipulation operations that are incompatible with an acknowledged Flow; using them is error-prone.

Continuing to use the delegator pattern, I've created an implementation of AckedFlowGraph that supports a subset of the features. Here's some code using it:


Conclusion

As of this writing, the AckedStream is contained within the op-rabbit akka-stream integration, and can be found here, with examples found in the tests. The code is general enough that I will likely end up extracting it into its own library, although I presently have no need for it outside of the context of using RabbitMQ.

Some of this code may make some generalists frown. I consistently fought, along the way, a feeling inside that I was creating too many types. However, because of the aforementioned reasons, I feel the complexity is warranted because, fundamentally, acknowledged streams are different from non-acknowledged streams: their operations have different behavior, their supported operation lists don't overlap completely, and haphazardly intermixing acknowledged streams and non-acknowledged streams will cause issues.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Ready, Set, Fling ALL THE (BAD ARGUMENTS) !!!!

Recently, there was an infographic going around on Facebook with the purpose of warning us of the evils of genetically modified organisms. I confess to have been rather amused by the subtle grim reaper in the background. Scientific publications should take a queue from this meme producer.


Here's my take on how these arguments hold up:
  1. Seems to be an okay argument. If the soil is heavily contaminated with pesticides, only GMO seeds will survive the soil conditions, and farmers will be forced to switch to a new plot of land (or find a way to remove the soil contaminant). Glyphosate, an enzyme inhibitor, breaks down in the environment and has a half-life of 3 to 130 days; 75%-99.99% will be removed in just over a years time, 97%-99.99999999% (or so) in about two years.
  2. Okay argument, but see #1 re: half-life of glyphosate. (if this were entirely true, I don't think I would need to spray for weeds every year).
  3. True... _BUT_: Mono-cropping has been used in traditional agricultural for hundreds of years. That doesn't make it a good practice, it just doesn't make it exclusively true for GMO agriculture.
  4. Weak. As I understand it, Monsanto is not using this technology (currently? or are they?). However, if they did, terminator seed makes a genetic sequence inherently unfit. Nature will select against it. So the effects wouldn't last and it certainly won't wipe a species of crop off the planet (although, admittedly, this position is not specifically taken by Rawforbeaty's grim-reaper-backed info-graphic).
  5. Weak / misguided. Again this is an entirely different problem and is not unique to GMO crops.

Will I be eating GMO crops? Probably not, I'd prefer the tried and true food source with which our bodies have evolved through the years. Would I eat it if the choice were between cheap GMO food and starvation? You bet. Does cheap food lead to over-population and other problems? It seems to be the case.

Could bad things come from this? It's possible. But the same could be said for the Internet, the Television, the Radio, the Automobile, the Antibiotic, the Vaccine....

Does that mean it's an intelligent thing to do, to sling any haphazard argument that can be produced against it?




Ignorance is Strength?

Growing impatient with ignorant absolute disdain for scientific medicine, so the following rant is my coping mechanism:



Human's screw up everything through science?

In a time, long long ago (long before Monsanto came around and destroyed all the planet), some human cell screwed up while copying DNA and changed a genetic sequence. The so-affected sequence contained the blueprint for producing a rather-necessary digestive enzyme; for short, we'll call it "very long-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase". Lucky for the offspring, he happened to receive two copies of this blue-print (redundancy is king!), so his body was still able to make the functioning enzyme. He lived a happy, normal life, and passed the faulty recessive trait on to his offspring. After a while, the recessive trait made its rounds until it started happening that both parents contained the recessive trait. For some reason, said parent's children would die shortly after birth with a 1/4 chance. Clueless as to what caused the death, 3/4 children would turn out fine and continue to propagate the gene.

Fast-forward to the near present. Meet my nephew: born into this world to WONDERFUL parents that both happen to carry the recessive genetic trait. My nephew is awesome! I love this little guy. He got two copies of the recessive trait and has a genetic disease known as VLCAD.

Thanks to advances in scientific medicine, medical screening promptly detected the disease and medical intervention saved his life. Thanks to understanding of the condition, he will live a healthy life! This is so awesome, because, like I said, my little nephew is a REALLY COOL KID. Thanks to advances in scientific medicine, we can all be screened for this recessive trait and know the chances of our children being born with a genetic disease. This is REALLY COOL!

If you think nature is so good at everything, and that we should stop medling with nature, let me introduce you to an idea: NATURE KILLS BABIES [1]. Nature applies natural selection MERCILESSLY AND WITHOUT FEELING. Nature is the means through which future generations are blessed by the fact that the "unfit for survival" did not survive.

Application of science is not perfect? Sometimes it goes awry and people die? Application of science does harm, from time to time? Profit motives cause people to make compromises that are less than optimal? Sure, it happens occasionally. Can it be better? Yes. Nature still kills babies, and medical science is getting in its way more than ever before.

My plea is that we set down our weapons of sweeping generalizations, putting forth any argument not because they are sound but because they support a position we've adopted by studying the facts presented by one heavily biased view.

Since somebody's believer is another's cynic, it seems like a good idea to tread with skepticism any time you see a perfectly constructed, dichotic exaltation/demonization of the sides of a given issue; at least until you have tried to argue the pros and cons of both sides.

[1] Certain situations only. (that's called honesty!)

Saturday, October 27, 2012

Spaced Repetition Learning Systems: Achieving Flow in Rote Memorization

My 5-year-old daughter and I have been working on her flash cards using the old physical decks for some time. Not having much of a system other than just cycling through the same old deck started to feel wasteful: I didn't have a good way to prioritize the cards with which she'd particularly struggled, so we spent the largest majority of the time going through words she knew really well. Even more, it seemed to discourage her from learning new words as hard words were shown too infrequently between a long stream of easies that the fluctuation between boredom and frustration stressed her out.

For some time friends of mine have recommended to me the Anki flash card system; Anki is an implementation of the Spaced Repetition Learning System: a system of learning based on common-sense principles such as showing at greater frequency cards with which the learner struggles, and less frequently those that have been mastered.

Using this system, it seems that my daughter gets a well-balanced mix of words she's already mastered, words she's learning, and brand new words, and in the end that seems to help keep her in the optimal state of flow while learning [1]! This is corroborated by her being excited to do the flash cards each evening.

After using this system 15 minutes a day, in just ONE WEEK my daughter has mastered all 100 of the sight words her teacher had assigned! I am so proud of her!

If you'd like to learn more about the Anki system:





It runs on all the OS's and devices, including iOS, Mac OS, Android, and the web. (the developer seems to fund his efforts through iOS sales, as that is the only platform for which he charges, and notably, a charge I was happy to pay.)

  • [1] - Flow is the"... mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity" [Wikipedia]. One of the requirements to reach "flow" is an optimal balance between challenge and ability.

Saturday, May 26, 2012

Danger: Dragons

Promote safety with this effective warning tool:


Dragon silhouette lifted from Kary (who in turn lifted it from Here).



Thursday, May 24, 2012

Celiac disease

As some of you may have heard, this week I was diagnosed with celiac disease. I was shocked, as I went in to be tested for something else. There is a small chance that the diagnosis could be wrong, so further blood tests at being run to confirm the diagnosis.

Celiac disease is a genetic disease, but some people who have the gene sequence do not develop symptoms. "According to the University of Chicago Celiac Disease Center, if you are a first-degree relative (parent, child, brother or sister) of a person with celiac disease, you have a 1 in 22 chance of developing the disease in your lifetime. If you are a second-degree relative (aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, grandparent, grandchild or half-sibling), your risk is 1 in 39". (link). So odds are, if you're related to me: you're probably safe, but watch out for it. It manifests in a lot of different ways, and is very hard to diagnose by dietary experiments.

Gluten is in EVERYTHING, and figuring out whether or not it contains gluten is very complex, since it is often not specifically labeled as other common allergens are. Brown rice syrup, lunch meats, dressings, soy sauce, imitation bacon, and many other innocent sounding foods SOMETIMES DO contain gluten (link). It doesn't matter if I consume a little bit of gluten, or a lot of gluten: a small amount is all it takes to trigger auto-immune response, which in turns causes the damage. I went off of grains for 4 weeks during my low glycemic diet, but likely still consumed other products containing gluten during that time; this may be why I and other doctors missed the association.

To my friends and family reading this: I fear my diet, now even more restrictive than ever, will be more of a burden for others than it is for myself. I want to be clear: I have absolutely zero expectation that anyone prepare any special food for me at any family function, gathering, or party. It's stressful to others, and it's stressful to me. I'll plan on bringing my own food, or waiting until I get home to eat. So please, if you say, "I'm sorry I forgot to plan something for you, Tim", know that I will be mad (only for a brief second) for not honoring my wishes to not worry about me or feel any induced stress from my dietary needs. I'm very serious about this.

(I will be grateful if you do remember, and do plan something. I just don't expect it. I will need to dissect the ingredient list, and please don't be disappointed if I find a possible of source of gluten.)

Thank you.

Further reading on Wikipedia



Update: Blood test results confirmed the diagnosis.