research-article

Open access

Feature-Specific Profiling

Authors:

Vincent St-Amour,

Matthias FelleisenAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), Volume 41, Issue 1

Article No.: 4, Pages 1 - 34

https://doi.org/10.1145/3275519

Published: 19 December 2018 Publication History

All formats PDF

Abstract

While high-level languages come with significant readability and maintainability benefits, their performance remains difficult to predict. For example, programmers may unknowingly use language features inappropriately, which cause their programs to run slower than expected. To address this issue, we introduce feature-specific profiling, a technique that reports performance costs in terms of linguistic constructs. Feature-specific profilers help programmers find expensive uses of specific features of their language. We describe the architecture of a profiler that implements our approach, explain prototypes of the profiler for two languages with different characteristics and implementation strategies, and provide empirical evidence for the approach’s general usefulness as a performance debugging tool.

References

[1]

Gene M. Amdahl. 1967. Validity of the single processor approach to achieving large scale computing capabilities. In Proceedings of the Spring Joint Computer Conference.

Digital Library

[2]

Walter Binder, Danilo Ansaloni, Alex Villazón, and Philippe Moret. 2011. Flexible and efficient profiling with aspect-oriented programming. In Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience. John Wiley and Son, New York, 1749--1773. Retrieved from

Digital Library

[3]

John Clements, Matthew Flatt, and Matthias Felleisen. 2001. Modeling an algebraic stepper. In Proceedings of the European Symposium on Programming, 320--334.

Digital Library

[4]

John Clements, Ayswarya Sundaram, and David Herman. 2008. Implementing continuation marks in JavaScript. In Proceedings of the Scheme and Functional Programming Workshop, 1--10.

[5]

R. Kent Dybvig. 2009. Chez Scheme Version 8 User’s Guide. Cadence Research Systems.

[6]

R. Kent Dybvig, Robert Hieb, and Carl Bruggeman. 1993. Syntax abstraction in scheme. In LISP and Symbolic Computation.

Digital Library

[7]

Robert Bruce Findler, John Clements, Cormac Flanagan, Matthew Flatt, Shriram Krishnamurthi, Paul Steckler, and Matthias Felleisen. 2002. DrScheme: A programming environment for scheme. J. Funct. Program. 12, 2 (2002), 159--182.

Digital Library

[8]

Robert Bruce Findler and Matthias Felleisen. 2002. Contracts for higher-order functions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Functional Programming. Retrieved from

Digital Library

[9]

Matthew Flatt and Eli Barzilay. 2009. Keyword and optional arguments in PLT scheme. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Scheme and Functional Programming.

[10]

Matthew Flatt and PLT. 2010. Reference: Racket. PLT Inc., PLT-TR-2010-1. Retrieved from

[11]

Tony Garnock-Jones, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt, and Matthias Felleisen. 2014. The network as a language construct. In Proceedings of the European Symposium on Programming Languages, 473--492.

Digital Library

[12]

Matthias Hauswirth, Peter F. Sweeney, Amer Diwan, and Michael Hind. 2004. Vertical profiling. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, 251--269.

Digital Library

[13]

Carl Hewitt, Peter Bishop, and Richard Steiger. 1973. A universal modular ACTOR formalism for artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

Digital Library

[14]

Milan Jovic and Matthias Hauswirth. 2011. Listener latency profiling. Sci. Comput. Program. 19, 4 (2011), 1054--1072.

Digital Library

[15]

Jonas Maebe, Dries Buytaert, Lieven Eeckhout, and Koen De Bosschere. 2006. Javana: A system for building customized Java program analysis tools. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. Retrieved from

Digital Library

[16]

Simon Marlow, José Iborra, Bernard Pope, and Andy Gill. 2007. A lightweight interactive debugger for Haskell. In Proceedings of the Haskell Workshop, 13--24.

Digital Library

[17]

Jay McCarthy. 2010. The two-state solution: Native and serializable continuations accord. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, 567--582.

Digital Library

[18]

Scott Moore, Christos Dimoulas, Dan King, and Stephen Chong. 2014. SHILL: A secure shell scripting language. In Proceedings of the USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi14/technical-sessions/presentation/moore.

Digital Library

[19]

Floréal Morandat, Brandon Hill, Leo Osvald, and Jan Vitek. 2012. Evaluating the design of the R language. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming. Retrieved from

Digital Library

[20]

Todd Mytkowicz, Amer Diwan, Matthias Hauswirth, and Peter F. Sweeney. 2010. Evaluating the accuracy of Java profilers. In Proceedings of the Conference on Programming Languages Design and Implementation, 187--197.

Digital Library

[21]

Nicholas Nethercote and Julian Seward. 2007. Valgrind: A framework for heavyweight dynamic binary instrumentation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Programming Languages Design and Implementation. Retrieved from

Digital Library

[22]

Greg Pettyjohn, John Clements, Joe Marshall, Shriram Krishnamurthi, and Matthias Felleisen. 2005. Continuations from generalized stack inspection. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Functional Programming, 216--227.

Digital Library

[23]

R Development Core Team. 2016. R Language Definition. R Development Core Team, 3.3.1. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/&sim;r/current/arch/amd64_linux26/lib/R/doc/manual/R-lang.pdf.

[24]

Jeremy Singer and Chris Kirkham. 2008. Dynamic analysis of Java program concepts for visualization and profiling. Sci. Comput. Program. 70, 2--3 (2008), 111--126.

Digital Library

[25]

Vincent St-Amour, Leif Andersen, and Matthias Felleisen. 2012. Feature-specific profiling. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Compiler Construction. Retrieved from

[26]

Vincent St-Amour, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt, and Matthias Felleisen. 2012. Optimization coaching: Optimizers learn to communicate with programmers. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, 163--178.

Digital Library

[27]

Juan M. Tamayo, Alex Aiken, Nathan Bronson, and Mooly Sagiv. 2012. Understanding the behavior of database operations under program control. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, 983--996.

Digital Library

[28]

Sam Tobin-Hochstadt and Matthias Felleisen. 2008. The design and implementation of typed scheme. In Proceedings of the Conference on Principles of Programming Languages, 395--406.

Digital Library

[29]

Hadley Wickham. 2014. Advanced R, 1st ed. Chapman and Hall/CRC. Retrieved from http://adv-r.had.co.nz/.

Cited By

Moy CDimoulas CFelleisen M(2024)Effectful Software ContractsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36329308:POPL(2639-2666)Online publication date: 5-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632930
Greenman B(2023)GTP Benchmarks for Gradual Typing PerformanceProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Reproducibility and Replicability10.1145/3589806.3600034(102-114)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3589806.3600034
Moy CNguyễn PTobin-Hochstadt SVan Horn D(2021)Corpse reviver: sound and efficient gradual typing via contract verificationProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34343345:POPL(1-28)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3434334
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Feature-Specific Profiling
1. General and reference
  1. Cross-computing tools and techniques
    1. Performance
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software notations and tools
    1. Context specific languages
      1. Domain specific languages
      2. Macro languages
  2. Software organization and properties
    1. Extra-functional properties
      1. Software performance

Recommendations

Listener latency profiling: Measuring the perceptible performance of interactive Java applications

When developers need to improve the performance of their applications, they usually use one of the many existing profilers. These profilers generally capture a profile that represents the execution time spent in each method. The developer can thus focus ...
Accurate, efficient, and adaptive calling context profiling
PLDI '06: Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation

Calling context profiles are used in many inter-procedural code optimizations and in overall program understanding. Unfortunately, the collection of profile information is highly intrusive due to the high frequency of method calls in most applications. ...
Google-Wide Profiling: A Continuous Profiling Infrastructure for Data Centers

Google-Wide Profiling (GWP), a continuous profiling infrastructure for data centers, provides performance insights for cloud applications. With negligible overhead, GWP provides stable, accurate profiles and a datacenter-scale tool for traditional ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems

ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems Volume 41, Issue 1

March 2019

235 pages

ISSN:0164-0925

EISSN:1558-4593

DOI:10.1145/3299867

Editor:
Andrew Myers
Cornell University, USA

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 19 December 2018

Accepted: 01 September 2018

Revised: 01 May 2018

Received: 01 August 2017

Published in TOPLAS Volume 41, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Funding Sources

NSF
ONR
ERC

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
738
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)122
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)21

Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Moy CDimoulas CFelleisen M(2024)Effectful Software ContractsProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/36329308:POPL(2639-2666)Online publication date: 5-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3632930
Greenman B(2023)GTP Benchmarks for Gradual Typing PerformanceProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Reproducibility and Replicability10.1145/3589806.3600034(102-114)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3589806.3600034
Moy CNguyễn PTobin-Hochstadt SVan Horn D(2021)Corpse reviver: sound and efficient gradual typing via contract verificationProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/34343345:POPL(1-28)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3434334
Flatt MDybvig RDonaldson ATorlak E(2020)Compiler and runtime support for continuation marksProceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation10.1145/3385412.3385981(45-58)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3385412.3385981
Flatt MDerici CDybvig RKeep AMassaccesi GSpall STobin-Hochstadt SZeppieri J(2019)Rebuilding racket on chez scheme (experience report)Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/33416423:ICFP(1-15)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3341642

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents