Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 01 May 1997 15:45:42 -0600
From:      Steve Passe <smp@csn.net>
To:        Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>
Cc:        Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, Walter Haslbeck <WH@ODS.de>, smp@FreeBSD.ORG, everybodyunix@wup.de, jk@ct.heise.de
Subject:   Re: Dual PPro Mainboard f. SCO SMP 
Message-ID:  <199705012145.PAA08539@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 May 1997 17:11:25 EDT." <Pine.BSF.3.91.970501170835.2470B-100000@Journey2.mat.net> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

>Andreas, I think you really ought to double check this.  When I did my 
>own checks on my SMP setup, I found that just running make -j 8 (without 
>going smp) gave a serious speedup.  There WAS additional speedup when I 
>turned on smp, but it's NOT 2 for 1.  To do the benchmark correctly, you 
>have to run the same program in both places, and turning on the -j 8 
>feature for smp only is fooling you.

being a bi-noid I always have trouble with statistical type math, but I
would set the difference shown by these figures as 1.79

using "-j4" for UP and "-j8" for SMP is fair, as these produce the best results
for each case.

the time for UP at -j4:    213.17
the time for SMP at -j8:   119.08

 213.17 / 119.08 == 1.789696

not quite 2-1, but not shabby.

Chuck, you might want to re-try your test compiles, we have gained some speed
with recent changes.

--
Steve Passe	| powered by 
smp@csn.net	|            Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705012145.PAA08539>