From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 25 00:01:01 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 C258016A4CE for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:01:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.fci.fsu.edu (mail.fci.fsu.edu [128.186.195.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8023643D49 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:01:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from neuro@mail.fci.fsu.edu) Received: from mail.fci.fsu.edu (mail.fci.fsu.edu [127.0.0.1]) by mail.fci.fsu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D3941534DA; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:10:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:10:03 -0400 (EDT) From: neuro@mail.fci.fsu.edu To: Jon Noack In-Reply-To: <426C328A.9060606@alumni.rice.edu> Message-ID: References: <20050424175543.71041.qmail@web51805.mail.yahoo.com> <20050424151517.O68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <426C328A.9060606@alumni.rice.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed cc: /dev/null 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 List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:01:01 -0000 performance on many systems is very hard to gauge. I think this is something mostly left up to the individual, as hardware-software combinations truly make up the performance of a system. On Sun, 24 Apr 2005, Jon Noack wrote: > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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" >