Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 14:08:41 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com, roberto@blaise.ibp.fr, hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: Optimizing CVS? Message-ID: <9502012108.AA08106@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199502011625.DAA17258@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Feb 2, 95 03:25:46 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >Maybe we should optimize stat(2) before... Ask Remy about the tests > >he made between ext2fs and our ffs. Our stat(2) is way slower than the > >1.1.5.1 one. > > Actual testing shows that stat() is slightly faster under > FreeBSD-current than under linux-1.1.36 for files in a medium sized > directory, and 5 times faster under FreeBSD for files in a large > directory! FreeBSD is much slower at creating the files to be stat()ed > because it updates metadata synchronously. This is a bogus benchmark; you are hitting pages that are cached by virtue of the number of reps applied and the operation order. This does not show the speed loss is not in the stat in practice. In effect, you are testing system call + copyout time rather than system call + fetch + copyout time. This is the same type of reasoning that make Larry McVoy's lmbench mmap benchmark (map-but-don't-use) bogus. This is also the same type of thing that has UnixWare claiming 20 mic's for a system call. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9502012108.AA08106>