Anders Magnusson | 3 Jul 2012 18:22
Picon

Re: NetBSD/vax performance (Was: /etc/disktab on vax)

On 07/03/2012 05:50 PM, David Brownlee wrote:
>> Something that measure the time for system calls? I think I've seen such
>> things in the past, but I don't remember offhand right now.
> lmbench would be the classic for that - sample at
> http://www.bitmover.com/lmbench/lmbench-summary, and provides good
> microbenchmarks, but I think it would be helpful to have some higher
> level metrics as well, as well as raw network throughput.
Many years ago I found that hardclock() had begun to take very much 
time, and this is something that affects the overall performance but do 
not reveal itself easily.  I assume that the same thing can be said 
about softclock().

-- Ragge

Johnny Billquist | 3 Jul 2012 20:05
Picon
Picon

Re: NetBSD/vax performance (Was: /etc/disktab on vax)

On 2012-07-03 18:22, Anders Magnusson wrote:
> On 07/03/2012 05:50 PM, David Brownlee wrote:
>>> Something that measure the time for system calls? I think I've seen such
>>> things in the past, but I don't remember offhand right now.
>> lmbench would be the classic for that - sample at
>> http://www.bitmover.com/lmbench/lmbench-summary, and provides good
>> microbenchmarks, but I think it would be helpful to have some higher
>> level metrics as well, as well as raw network throughput.
> Many years ago I found that hardclock() had begun to take very much
> time, and this is something that affects the overall performance but do
> not reveal itself easily.  I assume that the same thing can be said
> about softclock().

Good point! I also have eyeballed the various lock primitives, atomic 
ops and so on...

	Johnny


Gmane