Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:35:37 +0000
From:      "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To:        Martin Matuska <mm@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD Compiler Benchmark: gcc-base vs. gcc-ports vs. clang 
Message-ID:  <60071.1299936937@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:02:23 %2B0100." <4D7B44AF.7040406@FreeBSD.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <4D7B44AF.7040406@FreeBSD.org>, Martin Matuska writes:


Thanks a lot for doing this properly.

>What significance level should I take?

I think I set ministat(1) to use 95 % confidence level by default
and that is in general a pretty safe bet (1 in 20 chance)

>I hope this approach is better :)

Much, much better.

As I said, this was not to go after you personally, but to point
out that we need to be more rigorous with benchmarks in general.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?60071.1299936937>