Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:44:59 -0400 From: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com> To: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, terry@freebsd.org, rwatson@freebsd.org, jlemon@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Mbuf Allocator (some graphs) Message-ID: <20010615194459.A1549@technokratis.com> In-Reply-To: <20010615183255.C68883@prism.flugsvamp.com>; from jlemon@flugsvamp.com on Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:32:55PM -0500 References: <20010615185421.A1179@technokratis.com> <20010615183255.C68883@prism.flugsvamp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:32:55PM -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:54:21PM -0400, Bosko Milekic wrote: > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > Here are some performance results. Keep in mind that we're still under > > Giant. > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~bmilekic/code/mb_alloc/results.html > > Just for comparision, 6-way results are at: > > http://www.flugsvamp.com/~jlemon/fbsd/netpipe/ Are you sure those aren't inverted? (i.e. swap(present, mb_alloc)?) In any case, the mb_alloc code you used still has the malloc() and free() calls during cluster allocation and freeing and still, it looks to me as very comparable nonetheless. > -- > Jonathan -- Bosko Milekic bmilekic@technokratis.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010615194459.A1549>