Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 12:53:36 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Vincent Schut <schut@sarvision.nl> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: this 48-core box... Message-ID: <CAJ-VmonDO3rbbctx-m3HF=7_m2EfjVh0n=yaM4=FhJdOtXnK8w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130920110535.42c984da@sarvision.nl> References: <52388C9B.6030205@foxbatcapital.com> <20130919155327.115e7344@sarvision.nl> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1309191157410.56073@btw.pki2.com> <20130920110535.42c984da@sarvision.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
.. just as a data point - there was a thread a while ago about numeric processing performance on linux vs bsd. It all boiled down to how jemalloc versus the linux allocator(s) allocate blocks. jemalloc will page align things after a certain size. Linux didn't. So when doing numeric processing, there was a lot of cache aliasing going on leading to inefficient cache usage and redundant memory operations. When the same workload on Linux was run on FreeBSD but with the Linux library/allocators, the performance was identical. No-one followed through. I think I may have to write a blog post about it. -adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonDO3rbbctx-m3HF=7_m2EfjVh0n=yaM4=FhJdOtXnK8w>