Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 09:26:09 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Raymond Kohler <raymond.j.kohler@lmco.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: questions about the state of current Message-ID: <20021030072609.GO36040@starjuice.net> In-Reply-To: <200210292106.g9TL6aoc010659@apollo.backplane.com> References: <2570443.1035916854787.JavaMail.wshttp@emss03g01.ems.lmco.com> <3DBEF55E.A0F9ED1B@mindspring.com> <200210292106.g9TL6aoc010659@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On (2002/10/29 13:06), Matthew Dillon wrote: > :Most of the speed difference is WITNESS, INVARIANTS, and other > :debugging code that's turned on by default in the config files > :for -current. You can turn most of it off. That said, -current > :is slower than -stable in a number of places, so expect some > :slowdown, if you are running non-concurrent code. > > I would concur with this diagnosis. With witness turned off > -current is around 15% slower then -stable for general purpose > computing, like a 'make buildworld -j 20', and I expect that > -stable will beat out -current on single-cpu boxes for a long > time to come. I hate to "me too", but I have a different flavour to offer prospective early adopters. I tried out -CURRENT on my Compaq Presario 2700 (yuk, spit), which is a 512MB PIII. When I downgraded to -STABLE, the performance with simple command-line stuff was noticible. Not huge, but "tangible to a human being". So the answer to "will I notice a performance degredation" is "yes for typical end-users, but not huge". Ciao, Sheldon. 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?20021030072609.GO36040>