Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 14:55:56 -0500 (EST) From: "Ron G. Minnich" <rminnich@Sarnoff.COM> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: John Dyson <dyson@freefall.freebsd.org>, lm@slovax.engr.sgi.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, waa@aurora.cis.upenn.edu, deraadt@theos.com, chuck@maria.wustl.edu Subject: Re: larry: you might want to add this to lmbench (but i'm not sure) Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951110144904.13530K-100000@morse> In-Reply-To: <199511101932.MAA04151@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ok, i'll try to explain it once again for some folks who don't seem to read either the complete message or the code attached. 1) this is measuring something i need to measure for work i'm doing 2) the numbers surprise me 3) i thought it might or might not make a performance measure, but was not sure. I pointed out it was not a "pure" measurement of lookup time, but was correlated with it. I didn't realize how pathological BSD behavior was in this one case, and yes I agree this is NOT A COMMON CASE, OK? I can see why so many people get sick of the bsd discussion lists: grown-ups seem to be in short supply. For the record, solaris is 4x the bsd performance in this case. What's interesting is 1) solaris has a far better vm archictecture than *bsd or linux (i've been able to accomplish things via sunos 4/solaris kernel that bsd can not even approach doing) 2) solaris does indeed run on smp's, and *bsd does not I don't know how that squares with some of the earlier comments. I'm sure that the god-like beings on this list won't hesitate to tell me :-) ron Ron Minnich |Like a knife through Daddy's heart: rminnich@sarnoff.com |"Don't make fun of Windows, daddy! It takes care (609)-734-3120 | of all my files and it's reliable and I like it".
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SOL.3.91.951110144904.13530K-100000>