From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 21:39:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D249B106567D for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:39:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tt-list@simplenet.com) Received: from mx1.securemailscan.com (ob2.scaledsystems.com [209.132.1.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 967668FC1D for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:39:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tt-list@simplenet.com) X-Warning: RFC compliance checks disabled due to whitelist X-Warning: Reverse-Path DNS check skipped due to whitelist X-Warning: Maximum message size check skipped due to whitelist X-Warning: System filters skipped due to whitelist X-Warning: Domain filters skipped due to whitelist X-Warning: User filters skipped due to whitelist X-Warning: Anti-Spam check skipped due to whitelist X-Whitelist: 2147483613 X-Envelope-From: tt-list@simplenet.com X-Envelope-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: From mta1.scaledsystems.com (209.132.1.201) by mx1.securemailscan.com (MAILFOUNDRY) id 6xxy4GitEd2MGgAw for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:33:27 -0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 45212 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2008 20:33:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?209.132.9.162?) (tt@simplenet.com@209.132.9.162) by mail.ssl.simplenet.com with ESMTPA; 12 Aug 2008 20:33:27 -0000 Message-ID: <48A1F379.2040805@simplenet.com> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:32:57 -0700 From: Tim Traver User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: 7.0 CPU and Memory Performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: tt-list@simplenet.com List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:39:32 -0000 Hi All, I have recently had the opportunity to upgrade a few servers from old versions of 5.4 to 7.0, and have seen some interesting data. Before doing this, I wanted to take some benchmarks to see how the scripts that I would run would fare between the two versions, and the results are somewhat confusing... I tried to get as many ducks in a row before posting this, cause i don't want to waste any of the developers precious time, but I can't guarantee that my methods were not flawed. For simplicity, I used a port called ubench (the latest version 0.3, which I know is quite old) to get the following numbers : Since I was doing this on the same machine, with completely different builds (not simply a compile upgrade, but a full install), I figure it doesn't really matter what kind of machine it is, but just for grins, it is a Dual Opteron with 2GB of memory in it, compiled with the i386 confs. The 7.0 is compiled with the ULE scheduler... The following are averages of at least 5 runs : FreeBSD 5.4 - CPU 112,721 - MEM - 146,483 FreeBSD 7.0 - CPU 177,339 - MEM - 95,920 Now, I really don't know exactly what the ubench program is doing, but I think the description says that it is doing random integer and floating point operations for the CPU tests, and random memory allocation and copying for the memory test. So, can we explain the difference???? It looks like the latest SMP code allows it to process more operations, but what happened to the memory operations???? Just to get an idea of what this was going to do to my scripts, I tried some benchmarks for those as well. I tried to run a PHP script using php 4.4.7 and got the following results : Using "time php index.php" to get the real time : FreeBSD 5.4 - 0.290 seconds FreeBSD 7.0 - 0.335 seconds So, do the slower memory operations cause that difference in the real time it takes to run that script??? Thanks, Tim.