ULE vs. 4BSD in RELENG_7
josh.carroll at gmail.com
Tue Oct 23 19:10:36 PDT 2007
> We can not ignore this performance bug, also I had found that ULE is
> slower than 4BSD when testing super-smack's update benchmark on my
> dual-core machine.
I actually saw improved performance with ULE over 4BSD for
super-smack. What were the parameters you used for your testing? These
super-smack ./select-key.smack 10 10000
super-smack ./update-select.smack 10 10000
I ran them again to confirm (10 runs each, averaged):
super-smack ./select-key.smack 10 10000 : 55235.3
super-smack ./update-select.smack 10 10000 : 17029
super-smack ./select-key.smack 10 10000 : 65758.5
super-smack ./update-select.smack 10 10000 : 17366.7
So select-key is 19% faster!
The numbers I had from 6.2 (4BSD, with libmap.conf set up to map
libpthread to libthr):
So either way, RELENG_7 is faster than 6.2 for super-smack, at least
for me. And ULE here is quite a bit faster for select-key.
More information about the freebsd-performance