Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:25:35 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@portaone.com> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pthreads performance Message-ID: <420CDC7F.4020208@portaone.com> In-Reply-To: <200502111651.25162.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> References: <420CC9F7.40802@portaone.com> <200502111651.25162.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Nottebrock wrote: > On Friday, 11. February 2005 16:06, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > >>Following is result of the run on my 5.3-STABLE/UP. > > >>-bash-2.05b$ time ./aqueue_kse -n 10000000 >>pusher started >>poper started >> >>real 0m15.477s >>user 0m15.432s >>sys 0m0.009s >>-bash-2.05b$ time ./aqueue_linuxthreads -n 10000000 >>pusher started >>poper started >> >>real 0m6.118s >>user 0m2.217s >>sys 0m0.932s > > > Here's what I get on a my UP 5.3-STABLE with ULE and PREEMPTION (thr & lc_r > not installed, hence not tested): Looks very much like either ULE or PREEMPTION pessimize LT without any positive effect on KSE. Neither option should have any effect on user time, while user times in your tests compare to user times in mine as 2:1 for both LT and KSE, while real time for KSE is also 2:1 but real time for LT is 3:1. Unfortunately I've tested on production machine, so that I can't recompile kernel with ULE & PREEMPTION to verify that. -Maxim > > [lofi@kiste]:~ > time ./aqueue_linuxthreads -n 10000000 > pusher started > poper started > > real 0m19.157s > user 0m4.639s > sys 0m5.545s > [lofi@kiste]:~ > time ./aqueue_kse -n 10000000 > pusher started > poper started > > real 0m32.619s > user 0m31.858s > sys 0m0.532s > > Still slower, but already lower than factor 2. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?420CDC7F.4020208>