From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 11 15:11:34 2005 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 C2E7716A4CE for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:11:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.portaone.com (support.portaone.com [195.70.151.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0D5E43D1F for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:11:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from [192.168.1.26] (SIRIUS-ats227-UTC.ukrtel.net [195.5.25.154]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.portaone.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j1BFBUst008141 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:11:32 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Message-ID: <420CCB1E.9090907@portaone.com> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:11:26 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Porta Software Ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "developers@freebsd.org" References: <420CC9F7.40802@portaone.com> In-Reply-To: <420CC9F7.40802@portaone.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/685/Wed Jan 26 10:08:24 2005 clamav-milter version 0.80j on www.portaone.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: Pthreads performance 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, 11 Feb 2005 15:11:34 -0000 Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Hi, > > Note: I am purposely posting this to developers to avoid banging into > "FreeBSD 5/6 is slow" drum. My pthreads knowellege is pretty basic, so > that it's possible that this all is false alarm. Grrr, e-mail auto-completion suxxxor. :-/ -Maxim > > I've found a post on some of Russian technical forums in which author > tries to compare performance of basic synchronisation primitives in > various threading packages available on FreeBSD. The interesting part is > that the linuxthreads clearly wins by a high margin - difference between > it and the next follower (kse) is almost 3x. I had tried to find some > error in the program logic, but failed. Another interesting thing is > that libthr, which is conceptually very close to linuxthreads, provides > worst result, being 8x slower than LT and almost 3x slower than kse/c_r. > > For those who can read Russian the original post can be found here: > http://www.opennet.ru/base/sec/test_freebsd_threads.txt.html > > Following is result of the run on my 5.3-STABLE/UP. > > -bash-2.05b$ time ./aqueue_c_r -n 10000000 > pusher started > poper started > > real 0m17.826s > user 0m17.766s > sys 0m0.048s > -bash-2.05b$ time ./aqueue_thr -n 10000000 > pusher started > poper started > > real 0m46.227s > user 0m18.706s > sys 0m27.423s > -bash-2.05b$ time ./aqueue_kse -n 10000000 > pusher started > poper started > > real 0m15.477s > user 0m15.432s > sys 0m0.009s > -bash-2.05b$ time ./aqueue_linuxthreads -n 10000000 > pusher started > poper started > > real 0m6.118s > user 0m2.217s > sys 0m0.932s > -bash-2.05b$ > > Test case and script that compiles it can be found there: > > http://www.portaone.com/~sobomax/aqueue.c > http://www.portaone.com/~sobomax/build.sh > > -Maxim > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > >