在这个网站上已经有很多性能问题了,但是在我看来,几乎所有的问题都是非常具体的,而且相当狭窄。几乎所有人都重复了避免过早优化的建议。

我们假设:

代码已经正常工作了 所选择的算法对于问题的环境已经是最优的 对代码进行了测量,并隔离了有问题的例程 所有优化的尝试也将被衡量,以确保它们不会使事情变得更糟

我在这里寻找的是策略和技巧,在一个关键算法中,当没有其他事情可做,但无论如何都要挤出最后百分之几。

理想情况下,尽量让答案与语言无关,并在适用的情况下指出所建议的策略的任何缺点。

我将添加一个带有我自己最初建议的回复,并期待Stack Overflow社区能想到的任何其他东西。


当前回答

更多的建议:

Avoid I/O: Any I/O (disk, network, ports, etc.) is always going to be far slower than any code that is performing calculations, so get rid of any I/O that you do not strictly need. Move I/O up-front: Load up all the data you are going to need for a calculation up-front, so that you do not have repeated I/O waits within the core of a critical algorithm (and maybe as a result repeated disk seeks, when loading all the data in one hit may avoid seeking). Delay I/O: Do not write out your results until the calculation is over, store them in a data structure and then dump that out in one go at the end when the hard work is done. Threaded I/O: For those daring enough, combine 'I/O up-front' or 'Delay I/O' with the actual calculation by moving the loading into a parallel thread, so that while you are loading more data you can work on a calculation on the data you already have, or while you calculate the next batch of data you can simultaneously write out the results from the last batch.

其他回答

建议:

Pre-compute rather than re-calculate: any loops or repeated calls that contain calculations that have a relatively limited range of inputs, consider making a lookup (array or dictionary) that contains the result of that calculation for all values in the valid range of inputs. Then use a simple lookup inside the algorithm instead. Down-sides: if few of the pre-computed values are actually used this may make matters worse, also the lookup may take significant memory. Don't use library methods: most libraries need to be written to operate correctly under a broad range of scenarios, and perform null checks on parameters, etc. By re-implementing a method you may be able to strip out a lot of logic that does not apply in the exact circumstance you are using it. Down-sides: writing additional code means more surface area for bugs. Do use library methods: to contradict myself, language libraries get written by people that are a lot smarter than you or me; odds are they did it better and faster. Do not implement it yourself unless you can actually make it faster (i.e.: always measure!) Cheat: in some cases although an exact calculation may exist for your problem, you may not need 'exact', sometimes an approximation may be 'good enough' and a lot faster in the deal. Ask yourself, does it really matter if the answer is out by 1%? 5%? even 10%? Down-sides: Well... the answer won't be exact.

不可能有这样的全面陈述,这取决于问题领域。一些可能性:

因为你没有直接指定你的应用程序是100%计算:

搜索阻塞的调用(数据库,网络硬盘,显示更新),并隔离它们和/或将它们放入线程中。

如果你使用的数据库恰好是Microsoft SQL Server:

研究nolock和rowlock指令。(在这个论坛上有一些讨论。)

如果你的应用是纯粹的计算,你可以看看我关于旋转大图像缓存优化的问题。速度的提高使我大吃一惊。

这是一个长期的尝试,但它可能提供了一个想法,特别是如果您的问题是在成像领域:代码中旋转位图

另一个是尽量避免动态内存分配。一次分配多个结构,一次释放它们。

否则,请确定最紧密的循环,并将它们与一些数据结构一起张贴在这里(无论是伪的还是非的)。

更多的建议:

Avoid I/O: Any I/O (disk, network, ports, etc.) is always going to be far slower than any code that is performing calculations, so get rid of any I/O that you do not strictly need. Move I/O up-front: Load up all the data you are going to need for a calculation up-front, so that you do not have repeated I/O waits within the core of a critical algorithm (and maybe as a result repeated disk seeks, when loading all the data in one hit may avoid seeking). Delay I/O: Do not write out your results until the calculation is over, store them in a data structure and then dump that out in one go at the end when the hard work is done. Threaded I/O: For those daring enough, combine 'I/O up-front' or 'Delay I/O' with the actual calculation by moving the loading into a parallel thread, so that while you are loading more data you can work on a calculation on the data you already have, or while you calculate the next batch of data you can simultaneously write out the results from the last batch.

如果更好的硬件是一个选择,那么一定要去做。否则

Check you are using the best compiler and linker options. If hotspot routine in different library to frequent caller, consider moving or cloning it to the callers module. Eliminates some of the call overhead and may improve cache hits (cf how AIX links strcpy() statically into separately linked shared objects). This could of course decrease cache hits also, which is why one measure. See if there is any possibility of using a specialized version of the hotspot routine. Downside is more than one version to maintain. Look at the assembler. If you think it could be better, consider why the compiler did not figure this out, and how you could help the compiler. Consider: are you really using the best algorithm? Is it the best algorithm for your input size?

减少可变大小(在嵌入式系统中)

如果您的变量大小大于特定体系结构上的单词大小,则会对代码大小和速度产生重大影响。例如,如果你有一个16位系统,经常使用一个长int变量,然后意识到它永远不能超出范围(−32.768…32.767)考虑将其减少到短int。

从我的个人经验来看,如果一个程序已经准备好或几乎准备好了,但是我们意识到它占用了目标硬件程序内存的110%或120%,那么对变量进行快速归一化通常可以解决这个问题。

到这个时候,优化算法或部分代码本身可能会变得令人沮丧的徒劳:

重新组织整个结构,程序就不再像预期的那样工作,或者至少引入了许多错误。 做一些聪明的技巧:通常你花了很多时间优化一些东西,并发现代码大小没有或很小的减少,因为编译器无论如何都会优化它。

Many people make the mistake of having variables which exactly store the numerical value of a unit they use the variable for: for example, their variable time stores the exact number of milliseconds, even if only time steps of say 50 ms are relevant. Maybe if your variable represented 50 ms for each increment of one, you would be able to fit into a variable smaller or equal to the word size. On an 8 bit system, for example, even a simple addition of two 32-bit variables generates a fair amount of code, especially if you are low on registers, while 8 bit additions are both small and fast.