From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Oct 23 04:55:42 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F129E16A4B3
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 23 Oct 2003 04:55:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com
	[216.136.174.115])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2ED9443F93
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 23 Oct 2003 04:55:42 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from q_dolan@yahoo.com.au)
Received: from q.onthenet.com.au (HELO ?192.168.100.154?)
	(q?dolan@203.10.89.214 with plain)
	by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2003 11:55:33 -0000
From: Q <q_dolan@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andy <andy-freebsd@splashground.de>
In-Reply-To: <20031023112353.GD14012@splashground.de>
References: <1066789354.21430.39.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	 <20031022082953.GA69506@rot13.obsecurity.org>
	 <1066816287.25609.34.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	 <20031022095754.GA70026@rot13.obsecurity.org>
	 <1066820436.25609.93.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	 <20031022144043.GI55642@dan.emsphone.com>
	 <20031022155058.GE3640@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
	 <20031022204200.GC14012@splashground.de>
	 <1066865808.42673.28.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
	 <20031023112353.GD14012@splashground.de>
Message-Id: <1066910120.58538.15.camel@boxster.onthenet.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:55:21 +1000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Some mmap observations compared to Linux 2.6/OpenBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
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: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:55:43 -0000

I beg to differ. It might show linear growth, but the OpenBSD graph is
definitely not O(n).

Seeya...Q

On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 21:23, Andy wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 09:36:48AM +1000, Q wrote:
> > This is interesting, and demonstrates what I have been seeing, however
> > OpenBSD obviously has other issues with it's mmap implementation
> > entirely separate from this discussion.
> 
> Indeed, but also note the OpenBSD graph¹
> is actually two graphs, one O(n) and One O(1).
> 
> aha
> 
> ¹ http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/mmap.png