On Mon, 25 Sep 2006, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
DS> > > > My experiments show that if you have enough memory to host radmdrive
for
DS> > > > /usr/src you'd better leave it for caching - there were no
statistically
DS> > > > meaningful performance difference, at least on machines with 1G+ RAM.
DS
Oliver Fromme wrote:
> Eric Anderson wrote:
> > Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > > Reading /usr/src from a physical disk certainly requires
> > > quite some I/O that takes more than zero time.
> >
> > But, in order to populate the ram disk, you must read /usr/src also from
> > something, and that also ta
Dmitry Morozovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Dmitry Morozovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > My experiments show that if you have enough memory to host radmdrive for
> > > /usr/src you'd better leave it for caching - there were no statistically
>
> here are a bunch of new numbers:
> make: dell 2950
> OS: Freebsd 6.2-PRERELEASE
> cpu: XEON 3.20GHz dualcore * 2
> memory: 4GB
>
> no swap configured/used.
>
> make buildworld -j 8:
>
> src & obj realusersystem
> hyper
> -
be
> interesting to repeat the test with /usr/src being in a
> RAM disk, so read I/O doesn't play that much of a role.
>
> Best regards
>Oliver
>
> PS: Numbers don't lie ... but are often misinterpreted.
or missused by salesmen/politician/etc :-)
i have run m
M disk, so read I/O doesn't play that much of a role.
Best regards
Oliver
PS: Numbers don't lie ... but are often misinterpreted.
--
Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing
Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd
Any o
[...]
> But when you perform the buildworld several times (as you
> should do when you're benchmarking properly), everything
> is already in the RAM disk. If you instead rely on caching
> but you don't have enough RAM to hold all of src + obj +
> toolchain in RAM, then src (or at least parts of it
Eric Anderson wrote:
> Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> > > > Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently
> > > > fast processors.
> > > >
> > > > Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and
> > > > repeat the benchmark. The numbers might lo
>
> --FCuugMFkClbJLl1L
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 04:11:12PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> >=20
> > OF> Because buildworld is
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Eric Anderson wrote:
EA> > > > My experiments show that if you have enough memory to host radmdrive
EA> > for > /usr/src you'd better leave it for caching - there were no
EA> > statistically
EA> > > meaningful performance difference, at least on machines with 1G+ RAM.
EA>
On 09/20/06 07:50, Oliver Fromme wrote:
Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently
> > fast processors.
> >
> > Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and
> > repeat the benchmark. The numbers might look
Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently
> > fast processors.
> >
> > Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and
> > repeat the benchmark. The numbers might look a little
> > different then. Of course, y
> KK> > My experiments show that if you have enough memory to host radmdrive
> for
> KK> > /usr/src you'd better leave it for caching - there were no statistically
> KK> > meaningful performance difference, at least on machines with 1G+ RAM.
> KK>
> KK> Really? My measurements show the opposit
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote:
KK> > OF> Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently
KK> > OF> fast processors.
KK> > OF>
KK> > OF> Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and
KK> > OF> repeat the benchmark. The numbers might look a little
KK> > OF> diffe
Danny Braniss wrote:
Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
K8-class CPU)
one 70g sata disk
DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3192.98-MHz K8-class CPU)
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 04:11:12PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote:
>
> OF> Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently
> OF> fast processors.
> OF>
> OF> Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and
> OF> repeat the benchmar
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote:
OF> Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently
OF> fast processors.
OF>
OF> Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and
OF> repeat the benchmark. The numbers might look a little
OF> different then. Of course, you should ha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) writes:
> Gary Corcoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' +
> > 'sys'.
> > But here 'user' is much greater than 'real' for both machines! The sense I
> > got from the other messages in this
Gary Corcoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' + 'sys'.
> But here 'user' is much greater than 'real' for both machines! The sense I
> got from the other messages in this thread is that 'user' time is somewhat
> meaningless (i.e. u
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 02:13:55PM -0400, Gary Corcoran wrote:
> Mike Meyer wrote:
> >In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Corcoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> >>The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' +
> >>'sys'.
> >>But here 'user' is much greater than 'real' for both mac
Mike Meyer wrote:
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Corcoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' + 'sys'.
But here 'user' is much greater than 'real' for both machines! The sense I
got from the other messages in this thread is that 'user'
Danny Braniss wrote on Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 09:36:01AM +0300:
> Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
>
> SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> K8-class CPU)
> one 70g sata disk
> DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(T
On Thursday 14 September 2006 19:28, Gary Corcoran wrote:
> The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' +
> 'sys'. But here 'user' is much greater than 'real' for both machines! The
> sense I got from the other messages in this thread is that 'user' time is
> somewhat mea
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Corcoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' + 'sys'.
> But here 'user' is much greater than 'real' for both machines! The sense I
> got from the other messages in this thread is that 'user' time is somewha
On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 01:28:03PM -0400, Gary Corcoran wrote:
> The confusing thing is that I thought 'real' time should be >= 'user' +
> 'sys'.
No. This is at best only ever approximately true on a uniprocessor
machine when there is no blocking I/O being performed.
A bit of thought about the
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
K8-class CPU)
one 70g sata disk
DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeo
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > What's the CPU configuration? The AMD is dual core - is that it? Could
> > the Xeon be dual-core and hyperthreaded, so it's got that many more
> > CPUs to contri
Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
>
> SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> K8-class CPU)
> one 70g sata disk
> DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3192.9
Danny Braniss wrote:
> [...]
> but the original question stands:
> why is the user time between the boxes so different,
Because the dual-core Opteron is significantly faster than
the (single-core) Xeon, so buildworld takes less (user) CPU
time. By the way, certain parts of buildworld make use
> On Wednesday 13 September 2006 08:36, Danny Braniss wrote:
> > Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
> >
> > SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> > K8-class
> > CPU) one 70g sata disk
> > DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3
On Wednesday 13 September 2006 08:36, Danny Braniss wrote:
> Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
>
> SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> K8-class
> CPU) one 70g sata disk
> DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3192.98-MHz
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
> >
> > SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> > K8-class CPU)
> > one 70g sata disk
> > DELL 2950: Intel
--- Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i.e. since the hyperthreading virtual CPUs are not
> actually real CPUs,
> > they spend a lot of time blocked in the same CPU
> core waiting for
> > another hyperthread to release a resource, so the
> threads are both
> > "running" from the point of vie
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:00:25PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > To illustrate, I have numbers for "make -j4" for a P4 with and without
> > hyperthreading enabled:
> >
> > machdep.hyperthreading_allowed: 1 -> 0
> > 50m55.99s re
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 01:00:25PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> > K8-class CPU)
> > one 70g sata disk
> > DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3192.98-MHz K8-class CPU)
> >
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
>
> SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
> K8-class CPU)
> one 70g sata disk
> DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon
Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and:
SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz
K8-class CPU)
one 70g sata disk
DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3192.98-MHz K8-class CPU)
4 s
37 matches
Mail list logo
