Hello everybody!
I would like to try filebench on SLES 10 SP1 (2.6.16.46-0.12-smp SMP x86_64)
and
Debian 'etch' (2.6.18-6-amd64 SMP x86_64) but don't seem to see much light yet:
First I tried version 1.1.1, configure runs fine but compilation fails
complaining
about missing procfs.h, missing
there's some code cleanup that's needed on the cross platform (linux/
mac) that should be coming soon .. for getting 1.1.1 to compile ..
first step .. remove the config.h in the filebench directory and see
how far you get on the native compile - i'll have to see if i have a
SLES and Debian V
Grab the 1.0-linux tarball -- I don't think all the Linux changes have
been cross-ported into 1.1 yet...
Richard
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 06:43:13AM -0700, Christian Fritze wrote:
> Hello everybody!
>
> I would like to try filebench on SLES 10 SP1 (2.6.16.46-0.12-smp SMP x86_64)
> and
> Debian
I know port_getn is more efficient that select() because when some event
happens on the port, port_getn simply return it; while by using select(), when
some event happens, select() tries to get the socket of this event, and then
tries to find which bit is related to the socket, then mask that bi
select() mode is not efficient, Is it because of select() function or is it
because of FD_ISSET() function?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
perf-discuss mailing list
perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
I think they are used in different ways...
port_getn() gets events from a port, while select() gets events from
one file or more file descriptors.
Rayson
On 3/10/08, Sophie Hu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know port_getn is more efficient that select() because when some event
> happens on th
so why select() is not as efficient as port_get mode?
is it because select() function is not efficient or is it because FD_ISSET()
function is not efficient? I do not know the details how they are implemented
internally.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 16:49 -0700, Sophie Hu wrote:
> I know port_getn is more efficient that select() because when some
> event happens on the port, port_getn simply return it; while by using
> select(), when some event happens, select() tries to get the socket of
> this event, and then tries to
I see, so the complexity of both select() and FD_ISSET is: O(FD_SETSIZE)
and the times we use FD_ISSET() to check if a socket is bitmasked in fd_set or
not depends on number of sockets we want to check.
Thanks a lot.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 16:49 -0700, Sophie Hu wrote:
>> I know port_getn is more efficient that select() because when some
>> event happens on the port, port_getn simply return it; while by using
>> select(), when some event happens, select() tries to get the socket of
>> th
Sophie Hu wrote:
> I see, so the complexity of both select() and FD_ISSET is: O(FD_SETSIZE)
> and the times we use FD_ISSET() to check if a socket is bitmasked in fd_set
> or not depends on number of sockets we want to check.
>
Correct.
/dev/poll, like event ports, also scales with the numbe
11 matches
Mail list logo
