Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:06:39 -0400 From: "Josh Carroll" <josh.carroll@gmail.com> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE vs. 4BSD in RELENG_7 Message-ID: <8cb6106e0710231806g224fa219n9c6bc4900dcef9b7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8cb6106e0710231455j1f97c694l5e54578442bde123@mail.gmail.com> References: <8cb6106e0710230902x4edf2c8eu2d912d5de1f5d4a2@mail.gmail.com> <b1fa29170710231047i50859fa7gde2904985a7a8c20@mail.gmail.com> <8cb6106e0710231257k154e9c6ev4b4ba8c3692206fb@mail.gmail.com> <8cb6106e0710231455j1f97c694l5e54578442bde123@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I decided to do some testing of concurrent processes (rather than a single process that's multi-threaded). Specifically, I ran 4 ffmpeg (without the -threads option) commands at the same time. The difference was less than a percent: 4bsd: 439.92 real 1755.91 user 1.08 sys ule: 442.10 real 1754.65 user 1.34 sys The difference in user/sys is slight, but there. Not sure if that's pertinent, though, given it is such a small percentage. I also ran the same scenario with mencoder, with similar results: 4bsd: 377.96 real 1501.58 user 2.04 sys ule: 377.50 real 1501.68 user 1.93 sys I think this is important, as it shows an N-process workload on an N-processor system is the same between ULE and 4BSD, while a single process (N-threads) workload on an N-processor system seems to favor 4BSD (at least for media encoding). I'm still unsure why MySQL is so much better with ULE, given these results. Again, hope this information is useful! Josh
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8cb6106e0710231806g224fa219n9c6bc4900dcef9b7>