From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 24 13:49:30 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327ED16A46E for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:49:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mrout2-b.corp.dcn.yahoo.com (mrout2-b.corp.dcn.yahoo.com [216.109.112.28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02AD513C4A7 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:49:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from unknown-10-101-135-185.yahoo.com.neville-neil.com (proxy7.corp.yahoo.com [216.145.48.98]) by mrout2-b.corp.dcn.yahoo.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/y.out) with ESMTP id l9ODcsHJ029300; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 06:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:38:41 +0800 Message-ID: From: gnn@freebsd.org To: "Josh Carroll" In-Reply-To: <8cb6106e0710231806g224fa219n9c6bc4900dcef9b7@mail.gmail.com> References: <8cb6106e0710230902x4edf2c8eu2d912d5de1f5d4a2@mail.gmail.com> <8cb6106e0710231257k154e9c6ev4b4ba8c3692206fb@mail.gmail.com> <8cb6106e0710231455j1f97c694l5e54578442bde123@mail.gmail.com> <8cb6106e0710231806g224fa219n9c6bc4900dcef9b7@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Shij=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.1 (i386-apple-darwin8.9.1) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE vs. 4BSD in RELENG_7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:49:30 -0000 At Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:06:39 -0400, Josh Carroll wrote: > > I decided to do some testing of concurrent processes (rather than a > single process that's multi-threaded). Specifically, I ran 4 ffmpeg > (without the -threads option) commands at the same time. The > difference was less than a percent: > > 4bsd: 439.92 real 1755.91 user 1.08 sys > ule: 442.10 real 1754.65 user 1.34 sys > > The difference in user/sys is slight, but there. Not sure if that's > pertinent, though, given it is such a small percentage. > > I also ran the same scenario with mencoder, with similar results: > > 4bsd: 377.96 real 1501.58 user 2.04 sys > ule: 377.50 real 1501.68 user 1.93 sys > > I think this is important, as it shows an N-process workload on an > N-processor system is the same between ULE and 4BSD, while a single > process (N-threads) workload on an N-processor system seems to favor > 4BSD (at least for media encoding). I'm still unsure why MySQL is so > much better with ULE, given these results. > > Again, hope this information is useful! > First of all, yes it is and thanks for doing all this. Second, the person who has been working on ULE is moving house so may not respond for a bit, so don't worry, you're work is not being ignored. Best, George