[R-pkg-devel] Winbuilder 'experimental' toolchain 4-5x slower than all other architectures

Then this is specific to your package, 

whole CRAN check:

https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_timings.html

which is 2379156 sec for old and 2516120 sec for the new toolchain, i.e. 
roughly a 6%. Given the machines runs with very different loads it could 
even be the other way round.

And for PerformanceAnalytics I get overall 418 sec for old and 446 sec 
(without vignettes each) for the new toolchain (again, load may have 
varied):
https://cran.r-project.org/web/checks/check_results_PerformanceAnalytics.html 




Best,
Uwe Ligges



On 05.02.2020 16:32, Brian G. Peterson wrote:

For every other architecture, Travis-CI and R-Hub take approximately
10-12 minutes to build and check PerformanceAnalytics.? On the Windows
Rtools4 experimental toolchain, the build/check on Winbuilder and R-Hub
take over an hour, sometimes as much as an hour and a half.

Non-trivial example timings are similarly 4-5x slower on the Windows
experimental toolchain.

Brian

On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 14:59 +0000, G?bor Cs?rdi wrote:

Can you please show some numbers?

Thanks,
Gabor

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:40 PM Brian G. Peterson <brian at braverock.com

wrote:
We've noticed over the past week that Winbuilder/R-Hub's
'experimental'
Rtools4 toolchain images for Windows are approximately 4-5x slower
than
all other containers to build and check several packages we
maintain.

This affects everything, including example timings, where this
architecture is the only architecture that shows any example run-
times
over 5 seconds. (including Windows under the older toolchain).

Does CRAN expect us to optimize our code for the clearly non-
performant
'experimental' Windows toolchain?

I'd like to send a new version of our package PerformanceAnalytics
to
CRAN, but the Windows experimental toolchain is preventing a 100%
clean
set of checks.


Regards,

Brian

-- 
Brian G. Peterson
ph: +1.773.459.4973
im: bgpbraverock