Date: 27 Feb 2002 14:38:17 -0600 From: Bob Van Valzah <Bob@Talarian.Com> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Jorge Aldana <jorge@salk.edu>, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Performance vs. Stable Message-ID: <1014842297.2359.117.camel@NewStorm.WhiteBarn.Com> In-Reply-To: <20020227220832.V48463-100000@gamplex.bde.org> References: <20020227220832.V48463-100000@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2002-02-27 at 05:36, Bruce Evans wrote: > You should use a more recent version of lmbench, That's exactly the sort of advice I needed. Thanks! > but you might be > rediscovering wheels here. John Dyson used lmbench many years ago to > motivate large optimizations in vm. I have used an alpha version of > lmbench2 since 1997 and have a database of about 100 files for interesting > milestones. I must have run it thousands of times. The web site > pointed to at the beginning of this thread has a not-so-alpha version. > It is a bit nicer than the 1997 version (it now gives times in nanoseconds > which is very necessary for current CPUs), but I haven't switched to > it because it can't parse my database. The 1997 version is much nicer > than lmbench1. It runs much faster and proces much better output and > has many relatively minor improvements in the basic benchmarks. Ok, let's get together off-list and work out a plan to avoid duplication but cary this work forward so we'll have a good time series. Bob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1014842297.2359.117.camel>