Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:35:03 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: josh.carroll@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mysql scaling questions Message-ID: <9bbcef730801020235r634fc67bo1239b9626da13fa2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8cb6106e0801012008q18830aebp906ebfeb3c519e5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <20071201205609.GA54238@harmless.hu> <47779AA7.2060801@FreeBSD.org> <20071230132451.GA61295@harmless.hu> <47779EBC.5020900@FreeBSD.org> <20071230134354.GA63555@harmless.hu> <4777A65C.8020406@FreeBSD.org> <20071230141118.GA67574@harmless.hu> <4777AB9C.1010003@FreeBSD.org> <flb6bp$8kq$1@ger.gmane.org> <8cb6106e0801012008q18830aebp906ebfeb3c519e5a@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 02/01/2008, Josh Carroll <josh.carroll@gmail.com> wrote: > > Does anyone have a theory why syscalls are so expensive in FreeBSD? Here > > are the results of unixbench 4.1 on two machines. First is the machine > > running FreeBSD HEAD (debugging disabled) on a dual-core Athlon 64 (i386 > > mode), 2 GHz: > > I ran the syscall benchmark from UnixBench on the same hardware (Intel > Q6600 @ 3.2 GHz) for both FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 (amd64) and Knoppix 5.1 > (Linux 2.6.9 PREEMPT kernel, i386). > > Per the comments in this thread, i386 syscalls should be less > expensive than amd64 syscalls, so the results are interesting: > > FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 (amd64): System Call Overhead > 15000.0 1103233.7 735.5 > Knoppix Linux 2.6.9 (i686): System Call Overhead > 15000.0 1108869.7 739.2 > Doesn't look like the syscalls are slower at all on FreeBSD. Thanks, I'll have to look further to see where the slowdowns are.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef730801020235r634fc67bo1239b9626da13fa2>