From owner-freebsd-current Fri Nov 29 11:32:21 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E3B37B401 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:32:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from bunrab.catwhisker.org (adsl-63-193-123-122.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.193.123.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2761143EA9 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:32:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: from bunrab.catwhisker.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bunrab.catwhisker.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gATJWHTe041068; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:32:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from david@bunrab.catwhisker.org) Received: (from david@localhost) by bunrab.catwhisker.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gATJWHL8041067; Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:32:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:32:17 -0800 (PST) From: David Wolfskill Message-Id: <200211291932.gATJWHL8041067@bunrab.catwhisker.org> To: dsyphers@uchicago.edu Subject: Re: 5.0-DP2 questions Cc: current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200211291304.47766.dsyphers@uchicago.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >From: David Syphers >Reply-To: dsyphers@uchicago.edu >Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 13:04:47 -0600 [Well, I'm Cc:ing -current anyway -- dhw] >Out of curiosity, how much slower is a 5.x kernel compilation than a 4.x, on >average? My 486, 66 MHz and 16 MB RAM, compiles a 4.x kernel in about 3 >hours. Thus by Robert's data point, -current seems at least 10-15 times >slower... OK; in each of the following, I was building the kernel as part of the process of upgrading from yesterday's -STABLE or -CURRENT, respectively. In each case, we are comparing -STABLE and -CURRENT running on the *same* hardware -- not merely "configured similarly"; each machine is set up to multi-boot, and runs -STABLE on slice 1 and -CURRENT on a different slice (3 for the laptop; 4 for the build machine). I track each of -STABLE and -CURRENT on a daily basis on each machine. First, the laptop: g1-9(4.7-S)[1] grep '^>>> Kernel' current stable-1 current:>>> Kernel build for LAPTOP_30W started on Fri Nov 29 08:59:55 PST 2002 current:>>> Kernel build for LAPTOP_30W completed on Fri Nov 29 09:35:30 PST 2002 stable-1:>>> Kernel build for LAPTOP_30W started on Fri Nov 29 06:12:25 PST 2002 stable-1:>>> Kernel build for LAPTOP_30W completed on Fri Nov 29 06:22:09 PST 2002 g1-9(4.7-S)[2] And now, the build machine: freebeast(4.7-S)[1] grep '^>>> Kernel' current stable-1 current:>>> Kernel build for FREEBEAST started on Fri Nov 29 06:59:37 PST 2002 current:>>> Kernel build for FREEBEAST completed on Fri Nov 29 07:25:28 PST 2002 stable-1:>>> Kernel build for FREEBEAST started on Fri Nov 29 05:14:10 PST 2002 stable-1:>>> Kernel build for FREEBEAST completed on Fri Nov 29 05:21:02 PST 2002 freebeast(4.7-S)[2] So: -STABLE -CURRENT Laptop 09:44 35:35 Build machine 06:52 25:51 I don't use -j for building kernels; I expect that the 2nd CPU on the build machine isn't all that significant for this workload. On the other hand, the slower disk drive in the laptop is likely fairly significant. In each case, the -CURRENT kernel that is running (& the one that is being built) has WITNESS , INVARIANTS, and DIAGNOSTIC defined. The laptop is a 750 MHz PIII with 256 MB RAM; the build machine is a 2x876 MHz PIII with 512 MB RAM. That should, at least, provide a reasonably valid set of comparisons. Cheers, david (links to my resume at http://www.catwhisker.org/~david) -- David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org I have no confidence in results obtained through the use of Microsoft products. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message