From owner-freebsd-current Wed Feb 6 2:38:38 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from dastardly.newsbastards.org.72.27.172.IN-addr.ARPA.NetScum.dyndns.dk (dclient217-162-168-252.hispeed.ch [217.162.168.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C509437B422 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 02:38:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from beerswilling.netscum.dyndns.dk (dcf77-zeit.netscum.dyndns.dk [172.27.72.27] (may be forged)) by dastardly.newsbastards.org.72.27.172.IN-addr.ARPA.NetScum.dyndns.dk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g16AcLX00672 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified FAIL) for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 11:38:23 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from bounce@dcf77-zeit.netscum.dyndns.dk) Received: (from root@localhost) by beerswilling.netscum.dyndns.dk (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g16AcKG00671; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 11:38:20 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from bounce@dcf77-zeit.netscum.dyndns.dk) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 11:38:20 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200202061038.g16AcKG00671@beerswilling.netscum.dyndns.dk> From: BOUWSMA Beery References: Subject: Re: Performance of -current vs -stable To: current@freebsd.org Organization: Men not wearing any pants that dont shave X-Hacked: via telnet to your port 25, what else? X-Internet-Access-Provided-By: Mountain Informatik AG, Zuerich X-NetScum: Yes X-One-And-Only-Real-True-Fluffy: No Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Serwoas! %s wrote on %.3s, %lld Sep 1993 > > Could it be due to the DDB, INVARIANTS & WITNESS options in the > > kernel? If it is that's fine with me, I'm just wondering where > > that magnitude of a slowdown would be coming from. > WITNESS can really hurt. Quite possibly I should turn it off in GENERIC now (I Hmmm, a few weeks ago I did some totally unscientific testing, noting that -current was much slower than -stable, by playing an mp3 with an optimized `mpg123' on a 75MHz pentium machine, where the difference was far more obvious than on a faster machine. I suspected that WITNESS and similar goodies might be a problem, and even composed a lengthy message wondering about it, but what really got me wondering was the fact that -stable had far less idle time than the same hardware running NetBSD-current, so that I could do `useful' work under NetBSD while playing an mp3 cleanly, but such was difficult with FreeBSD-stable and impossible with -current. However, I suspect that such a question is more on-topic in -hackers or even -stable than here, but I'm wondering if I should extract any useful info from the message I composed but never sent, and post my kernel config and ask if there's anything obvious in there that would explain why FreeBSD's mpg123 takes ~60% CPU and NetBSD's ~30% (vs the ~90+% usage by -current)... Oh, I'll try rebuilding -current Real Soon^W^W later today, without WITNESS, and compare, just to stay on-topic for this list. thanks barry bouwsma To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message