From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 24 23:58:14 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 83E8916A4CE for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:58:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp807.mail.sc5.yahoo.com (smtp807.mail.sc5.yahoo.com [66.163.168.186]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 43A5943D54 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:58:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from noackjr@alumni.rice.edu) Received: from unknown (HELO optimator.noacks.org) (noacks@swbell.net@70.240.205.64 with login) by smtp807.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Apr 2005 23:58:13 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimator.noacks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF6260D5; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:58:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from optimator.noacks.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (optimator.noacks.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 98046-03; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:58:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from compgeek.noacks.org (compgeek [192.168.1.10]) by optimator.noacks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0636060CF; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:58:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by compgeek.noacks.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j3ONw2ma000908; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:58:03 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from noackjr@alumni.rice.edu) Message-ID: <426C328A.9060606@alumni.rice.edu> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:58:02 -0500 From: Jon Noack User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050406) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: /dev/null References: <20050424175543.71041.qmail@web51805.mail.yahoo.com> <20050424151517.O68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> In-Reply-To: <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at noacks.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: noackjr@alumni.rice.edu List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:58:14 -0000 On 04/24/05 18:29, /dev/null wrote: > > > needed. All in all life on 5.x and the "upgrade" wasn't too bad. I will > say that there is ONE issue that I have found and have not yet solved. It > now takes at least 2 times longer to build any of the ports. Performance > in other areas seems to be lagging as well. I have since upgraded one of > the 2 servers to 5.4-RC2 and have been chasing 5.x ever since hoping to > find the performance issues will dissappear. If you are running a UP system, it is expected that 4.x will outperform 5.x in many situations due to the focus on SMP. Optimizing synchronization to increase performance is one of the main goals for 6.x (see the recent work on critical sections, for example). This will allow us to scale well on SMP systems without pessimizing performance on UP systems. Another point to remember is that compilation times with GCC 3.4 (default for recent 5.x) are much longer than those with 2.95 (default for 4.x), especially at higher optimization levels. This is one of the main reasons why it takes longer to compile a port. That said, in what specific areas are you seeing performance regressions? Jon