From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 17 02:24:36 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7639F16A506 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from perrin.nxad.com (internal.nxad.com [69.1.70.251]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF59043FBF for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:24:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sean@nxad.com) Received: by perrin.nxad.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 8EA5B2105C; Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:24:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:24:34 -0700 From: Sean Chittenden To: Jeff Roberson Message-ID: <20031017092434.GA45975@perrin.nxad.com> References: <20031017150929.T6652@gamplex.bde.org> <20031017022244.W30029-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031017022244.W30029-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> X-PGP-Key: finger seanc@FreeBSD.org X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3849 3760 1AFE 7B17 11A0 83A6 DD99 E31F BC84 B341 X-Web-Homepage: http://sean.chittenden.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More ULE bugs fixed. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:24:36 -0000 > I think you cvsup'd at a bad time. I fixed a bug that would have > caused the system to lock up in this case late last night. On my > system it freezes for a few seconds and then returns. I can stop > that by turning down the interactivity threshold. Hrm, I must concur that while ULE seems a tad snappier on the responsiveness end, it seems to be lacking in terms of real world performance compared to 4BSD. Fresh CVSup (~midnight 2003-10-17) and build with a benchmark from before and after. I was "benchmarking" a chump calc program using bison vs. lemon earlier today under 4BSD (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sqlite/message/5506) and figured I'd throw my hat in on the subject with some relative numbers. System time is down for ULE, but user and real are up. Under ULE: Running a dry run with bison calc...done. Running 1st run with bison calc... 52.11 real 45.63 user 0.56 sys Running 2nd run with bison calc... 52.16 real 45.52 user 0.69 sys Running 3rd run with bison calc... 51.80 real 45.32 user 0.87 sys Running a dry run with lemon calc...done. Running 1st run with lemon calc... 129.69 real 117.91 user 1.10 sys Running 2nd run with lemon calc... 130.26 real 117.88 user 1.13 sys Running 3rd run with lemon calc... 130.76 real 117.90 user 1.10 sys Time spent in user mode (CPU seconds) : 654.049s Time spent in kernel mode (CPU seconds) : 7.047s Total time : 12:19.06s CPU utilization (percentage) : 89.4% Times the process was swapped : 0 Times of major page faults : 34 Times of minor page faults : 2361 And under 4BSD: Running a dry run with bison calc...done. Running 1st run with bison calc... 44.22 real 37.94 user 0.85 sys Running 2nd run with bison calc... 46.21 real 37.98 user 0.85 sys Running 3rd run with bison calc... 45.32 real 38.13 user 0.67 sys Running a dry run with lemon calc...done. Running 1st run with lemon calc... 116.53 real 100.10 user 1.13 sys Running 2nd run with lemon calc... 112.61 real 100.35 user 0.86 sys Running 3rd run with lemon calc... 114.16 real 100.19 user 1.04 sys Time spent in user mode (CPU seconds) : 553.392s Time spent in kernel mode (CPU seconds) : 6.978s Total time : 10:40.80s CPU utilization (percentage) : 87.4% Times the process was swapped : 223 Times of major page faults : 50 Times of minor page faults : 2750 Just a heads up, it does indeed look as thought hings have gone backwards in terms of performance. -sc -- Sean Chittenden