Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:42:21 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> Cc: tundra@tundraware.com, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: unimpressive buildworld time Message-ID: <473D2DBD.2030100@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <473D2C62.3040707@u.washington.edu> References: <b41c75520711140856m3b082903l2378140d8cd394cb@mail.gmail.com> <473B6AF1.4010604@smo.de> <473B6C63.9060407@gmail.com> <200711151935.10550.freebsd@dfwlp.com> <473D1784.1040901@tundraware.com> <473D2C62.3040707@u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Garrett Cooper wrote: > Tim Daneliuk wrote: >> Jonathan Horne wrote: >>> On Wednesday 14 November 2007 03:45:07 pm Aryeh M. Friedman >>> wrote: >>>>> Impressive ;-) My main machine (with an Athlon XP @ 2GHz) >>>>> takes ~2 hours to build kernel and world (I use a script to >>>>> do that). My other box is running -CURRENT and takes ~11 >>>>> hours to build kernel and world (Celeron 500...). >>>>> >>>>> Just to supply some numbers that "go the other direction" >>>>> :-) >>>> With no -j and running gnome and doing other things in the >>>> foreground (watching a avi) 1 hr 3 mins on a e6850 w/ 4 gig >>>> (amd64) >>> >>> p4 540 3.2GHz, 1GB ram: >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> World build completed on Thu Nov 15 19:15:05 CST 2007 >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> real 63m8.635s user 102m44.096s sys 10m44.889s >>> [root@athena /usr/src]# >>> >>> heh, i have appropriately renamed the thread. :) with -j 8 >>> >>> cheers, >> >> My Pentium-D 3G DualCore w/2G memory and a pretty vanilla SATA >> drive does buildworld and 3 different kernels in 68 minutes wall >> time building 6.3-PRE (aka -STABLE) using -j20. > > SMP kernels on STABLE (6.x) are going to perform worse than SMP > kernels on CURRENT (7-RELENG / 8-CURRENT), depending on the > scheduler used (4BSD vs ULE scheduler), as well as a variety of > other factors. > > Remember... performance not only depends upon clock speed or the > number of cores you have, but also what caching/prefetching scheme > FreeBSD uses (not sure if it's fetches large amounts infrequently > or small amounts frequently), how much memory is available to make > and its spawned processes (gcc, awk, etc), as well as the number of > processes active on the machine, and host usage (high disk usage, > high memory usage, etc). > > After reading through the thread, I noticed that people are making > comparing apples to oranges, as... Some people are taking this thread *WAY TOO SERIOUS* as far I can tell it is meant as a light hearted lets post funny numbers thread. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHPS2RJ9+1V27SttsRAteLAKCPAcEL9UIyBonCU4/5ZYUzejUhsACeOqL6 YFh9oTl8TkOmbfJXLvbueyE= =hDCA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?473D2DBD.2030100>