From owner-freebsd-current Fri Mar 22 17:43:11 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.chesapeake.net (chesapeake.net [205.130.220.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6579537B41A; Fri, 22 Mar 2002 17:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (jroberson@localhost) by mail.chesapeake.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2N1h3h95841; Fri, 22 Mar 2002 20:43:03 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 20:43:03 -0500 (EST) From: Jeff Roberson To: jhb@freebsd.org Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Peculiar(?) slowdown with -CURRENT as of 21 March Message-ID: <20020322204145.J88743-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I saw some similar weirdness in my test machines last night where a dual > processor DS20 (Alpha 21264 500x2) beat out a PII Xeon 450x4. Normally the > quad xeon beats the DS20. The quad xeon was using -j16 but was about 74% > idle. > The DS20 had used -j8. I didn't get a chacne to run top to see how it was > doing during hte world since I didn't notice the weirdness until last night > after the DS20 had finsihed but the quad xeon was still chugging along. > Are you both running with WITNESS and INVARIANTS? UMA is slightly slower with these options on than the original malloc & vm_zone code. I'm not sure why it would be even worse for SMP machines though. So maybe it isn't UMA at all but it's worth looking into. Thanks, Jeff To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message