Re: Poor performance in path tracing example (using WebWorkers)

On 25 mai, 23:19, David Mandelin <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think it's not tracing:
>
> Recording starting fromhttp://29a.ch/sandbox/2010/cornellbox/worker.js:194@100
> (FragID=000000)
> Abort recording of treehttp://29a.ch/sandbox/2010/cornellbox/worker.js:194@100
> athttp://29a.ch/sandbox/2010/cornellbox/worker.js:201@0:Inner tree is
> an unsupported type of recursion.

Thanks for your prompt answer. I was pretty sure myself this was due
to tracing abortion (path tracing algorithms are implemented
recursively more often than not), but I wanted to be sure ...


> Could you try recoding it to use iteration instead of recursion in
> Renderer.trace and see what that does to perf?

Unfortunately, I am not the developer of this path tracing test (I
just happen to shudder every time I read someone claiming Chrome is
immensely faster than FF).
However I will make sure to tell the author of this example to
implement his algo using iteration if he wants solid performance on FF
before JaegerMonkey makes it to an official release ...

Thanks again for your time.

Matthieu.