From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct 28 11:11:29 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF491106564A
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:11:29 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dcherednik@masterhost.ru)
Received: from mail.corp.masterhost.ru (wincas02.mail.corp.masterhost.ru
	[90.156.219.212])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB108FC13
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:11:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from kzholnay-pc.masterhost.ru (87.242.97.5) by
	mail.corp.masterhost.ru (90.156.219.210) with Microsoft SMTP Server
	(TLS) id 14.1.339.1; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:00:29 +0400
Message-ID: <4EAA8B4B.2090002@masterhost.ru>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:00:27 +0400
From: Daniil Cherednik <dcherednik@masterhost.ru>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: <hackers@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [87.242.97.5]
Cc: 
Subject: performance of fork() syscalls
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:11:30 -0000

Hello.
I have some questions about performance fork syscall.

The simple test:

int main(){
int i;
int pid;
char *test;
signal(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN);
for (i = 0; i <10000; i++) {
pid = fork();
if (!pid)
return 0;

}
}

Result in FreeBSD (8.2, amd62):

real 0m2.010s
user 0m0.053s
sys 0m1.946s

Result in Linux (2.6.32-5-amd64):

real 0m1.210s
user 0m0.008s
sys 0m1.200s

Of course the machines for test is same.

CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz (2992.52-MHz K8-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0xf41 Family = f Model = 4 Stepping = 1
Features=0xbfebfbff<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE>
Features2=0x641d<SSE3,DTES64,MON,DS_CPL,CNXT-ID,CX16,xTPR>
AMD Features=0x20000800<SYSCALL,LM>
TSC: P-state invariant
real memory = 4294967296 (4096 MB)
avail memory = 4113141760 (3922 MB)
ACPI APIC Table: <A M I OEMAPIC >
FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 4 CPUs
FreeBSD/SMP: 2 package(s) x 1 core(s) x 2 HTT threads
cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0
cpu1 (AP/HT): APIC ID: 1
cpu2 (AP): APIC ID: 6
cpu3 (AP/HT): APIC ID: 7

Does this mean performance of fork() in Linux is better? And can you 
explain why?


-- 

С уважением,
Daniil Cherednik
.masterhost