From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Jun 15 16:56: 2 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from prism.flugsvamp.com (cb58709-a.mdsn1.wi.home.com [24.17.241.9])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B2D8F37B43F; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jlemon@flugsvamp.com)
Received: (from jlemon@localhost)
	by prism.flugsvamp.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) id f5FNtTT74282;
	Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:55:29 -0500 (CDT)
	(envelope-from jlemon)
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:55:29 -0500
From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>
To: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com>
Cc: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>,
	freebsd-current@freebsd.org, terry@freebsd.org, rwatson@freebsd.org,
	jlemon@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: New Mbuf Allocator (some graphs)
Message-ID: <20010615185529.D68883@prism.flugsvamp.com>
References: <20010615185421.A1179@technokratis.com> <20010615183255.C68883@prism.flugsvamp.com> <20010615194459.A1549@technokratis.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i
In-Reply-To: <20010615194459.A1549@technokratis.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-current.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-current>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-current>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 07:44:59PM -0400, Bosko Milekic wrote:
> 
> 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)?)

Yup, I'm sure.  The 'local' tests were done last night, the 'stream'
tests were done today with the same pair of kernels.


> 	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. 

The results look good to me; the only thing that really stands out 
is the signature graph for stream tests; that odd curve at the start
of the run.  However, if I'm interpreting it correctly, it shows 
better performance in the mb_alloc case.
-- 
Jonathan

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message