The only obvious one is that read() shown under strace, takes a significant more time on the new machine than the old one
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Shachar Shemesh <[email protected]> wrote: > Noam Meltzer wrote: > > the time output does looks like you have higher cpu usage for some reason, > so i agree with Shachar on this. > > you can also try to pinpoint the place the cpu is spent. > strace and/or ltrace with the '-f -c' flags can help. > > I'm not sure about ltrace, but strace will not help. Most of the time is > spent in user space, not in the kernel. > > Strace may help if the problem is time spent in another process (i.e. - > while the main process is sleeping), but it seems Noam has already tried > that one and failed to spot any obvious candidates. > > Shachar > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Shachar Shemesh <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Noam Rathaus wrote: >> >> I know the time difference doesn't look too bad, but take a bigger code >> set: >> >> Fast: >> real 0m1.682s >> user 0m1.584s >> sys 0m0.064s >> >> Slow: >> real 0m16.730s >> user 0m9.345s >> sys 0m0.096s >> >> These times spell "CPU intensive". Does your library do anything >> special? If you try to import a dummy library, does this still happen? >> >> Shachar >> >> -- >> Shachar Shemesh >> Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd.http://www.lingnu.com >> >> > > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Lingnu Open Source Consulting Ltd.http://www.lingnu.com > >
_______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
