* qsbench on old kernels @ 2001-10-11 8:45 Lorenzo Allegrucci 2001-10-13 6:56 ` Stepan Kalichkin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Lorenzo Allegrucci @ 2001-10-11 8:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Some interesting results.. Linux-2.2.19: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.940u 3.550s 2:58.18 41.8% 0+0k 0+0io 167775pf+155540w <------- lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.010u 3.280s 2:43.83 44.7% 0+0k 0+0io 147384pf+135855w <------- lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.160u 2.940s 2:43.73 44.6% 0+0k 0+0io 146437pf+135856w <------- kswapd CPU time: 1:08 Linux-2.4.0: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 73.120u 5.720s 3:00.83 43.5% 0+0k 0+0io 149pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.560u 5.530s 3:02.87 42.1% 0+0k 0+0io 171pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.090u 6.140s 3:04.98 41.7% 0+0k 0+0io 170pf+0w kswapd CPU time: 0:06 Linux-2.4.6: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 79.160u 3.320s 4:23.24 31.3% 0+0k 0+0io 2776pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.690u 1.950s 2:41.22 45.6% 0+0k 0+0io 176pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.570u 2.260s 2:40.78 45.2% 0+0k 0+0io 177pf+0w kswapd CPU time: 2:36 Linux-2.4.7: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 79.160u 3.480s 4:25.44 31.1% 0+0k 0+0io 2823pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.460u 2.210s 2:40.05 46.0% 0+0k 0+0io 174pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.380u 1.850s 2:42.52 44.4% 0+0k 0+0io 177pf+0w kswapd CPU time: 2:39 Linux-2.4.8: n/a, system deadlocked during third run. Linux-2.4.9: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.100u 2.160s 3:03.79 39.8% 0+0k 0+0io 147pf+0w Lots of "__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed." Runs 1 and 2 n/a. Linux-2.4.10: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.410u 1.870s 2:45.25 43.7% 0+0k 0+0io 16088pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.910u 1.840s 2:45.16 44.0% 0+0k 0+0io 16338pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.310u 1.910s 2:45.20 44.3% 0+0k 0+0io 16211pf+0w kswapd CPU time: 0.03 Linux-2.4.11: lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.020u 1.650s 2:20.74 51.6% 0+0k 0+0io 10652pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 71.070u 1.650s 2:21.51 51.3% 0+0k 0+0io 10499pf+0w lenstra:~/src/qsort> time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 140175100 seed = 140175100 70.790u 1.670s 2:21.01 51.3% 0+0k 0+0io 10641pf+0w kswapd CPU time: 0.04 -- Lorenzo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: qsbench on old kernels 2001-10-11 8:45 qsbench on old kernels Lorenzo Allegrucci @ 2001-10-13 6:56 ` Stepan Kalichkin [not found] ` <001301c153d2$ea1448c0$731086d4@aitjgumcdtb6u> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Stepan Kalichkin @ 2001-10-13 6:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Hi I compiled qsbench under windows 2000 And get some interesting results: Under my linux kernel 2.4.9-ac18 localhost:~/test/qs_bench > time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 14538 seed = 14538 real 1m50.442s user 1m48.410s sys 0m1.660s And under windows with same parameters: seed = 14538 time = 48s -- seed = 14538 time = 47s -- seed = 14538 time = 48s May be this comparison is't correctly but so large difference! Any comments? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <001301c153d2$ea1448c0$731086d4@aitjgumcdtb6u>]
* Re: qsbench on old kernels [not found] ` <001301c153d2$ea1448c0$731086d4@aitjgumcdtb6u> @ 2001-10-15 6:18 ` Stepan Kalichkin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Stepan Kalichkin @ 2001-10-15 6:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: twoity; +Cc: linux-kernel I use MSVC on windows 2000 and use Release build. However I realy forgot turn on optimization in gcc. When I compiled qsbench with -O2 situation was a little changed. I have Pentium III (Coppermine) 800MHz with 512MB RAM when qsbench runing with 90 million integers his fill 343 MB in RAM and swap realy don't used. localhost:~free total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 513768 25412 488356 0 1724 13120 -/+ buffers/cache: 10568 503200 Swap: 514072 0 514072 localhost:~/test/qs_bench > time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 14538 seed = 14538 real 1m2.093s user 1m0.540s sys 0m1.550s I was running from the command shell under linux too. That's more best results but windows has 48s on same operation however Then I decide to try use swap. And run qsbench with -n 140000000 This is require 534Mb in ram My results is: localhost:~/test/qs_bench > time ./qsbench -n 140000000 -p 1 -s 14538 seed = 14538 real 2m46.062s user 1m36.910s sys 0m3.960s ---------------------------------- localhost:~/test/qs_bench > time ./qsbench -n 140000000 -p 1 -s 14538 seed = 14538 real 2m51.967s user 1m36.670s sys 0m3.810s And under windows 2000: seed = 14538 time = 511s [System Summary] OS Name Microsoft Windows 2000 Server Version 5.0.2195 Build 2195 OS Manufacturer Microsoft Corporation System Name STEP System Manufacturer ABIT System Model 6A69RA1K System Type X86-based PC Processor x86 Family 6 Model 8 Stepping 3 GenuineIntel ~806 Mhz BIOS Version BIOS Rev:0.1 Windows Directory C:\WINNT System Directory C:\WINNT\System32 Boot Device \Device\Harddisk0\Partition4 Locale Russia User Name STEP\step Time Zone N. Central Asia Daylight Time Total Physical Memory 523760 KB Available Physical Memory 442444 KB Total Virtual Memory 1530844 KB Available Virtual Memory 1313744 KB Page File Space 1007084 KB Page File C:\pagefile.sys So in my conclusion. Windows have more performance in comparison with linux when swap is't used. And when swap is start using linux be ahead like hell On Saturday 13 October 2001 17:36, you wrote: > I have to admit, I was curious to see what the respective performances > would be; I tried the original program on my athlon700 with 256Mb ram > and IDE disk under both a recent linux kernel and windows 2000 SP2. > > With 90 million integers being sorted the memory required is ~360 Mb > so that I had to enable swap in linux(iirc the idea of the exercise > was to measure performance under a swap load). Windows 2000 was set > to use 400Mb of swap. > > Linux took 6 1/2 minutes, windows 2000 took 20+ minutes. This makes > perfect sense to me - windows was running a full graphical shell, its > memory usage amounted to about 70Mb without the program running, on > the other hand I was running from the command shell under linux, and > so the portion of data in swap was lower, decreasing drastically the > number of slow swapouts/ins. > > From your results, it seems that the program is not swapping. In this > case linux and windows 2000 should come up with identical numbers (as > 95+% of time is spent in the user program). > > I suspect the difference therefore is in your qsbench - did you compile > with optimization on linux, but use "Release build" on windows 2000? > (Assuming you use MSVC for the windows executable). > > If this is the case, try > > gcc -O2 qsbench.c -o qsbench > > to produce a new linux executable; then the times should be the same. > > Alternatively try increasing the number of integers sorted until the > program begins to swap, the performance should become dominated by > the speed of the disk. > > I think a more interesting comparison would be where identical amounts > of the program are in swap on both windows 2000 & linux - this could > be achieved by passing mem= options to the linux kernel at boot to > emulate the effect of MS's memory filling programs. > > Or maybe windows 2000 is 2x the performance of linux? I'm ready to be > pleasantly suprised. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stepan Kalichkin" <step@ac-sw.com> > To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2001 7:56 AM > Subject: Re: qsbench on old kernels > > > Hi > > I compiled qsbench under windows 2000 > > And get some interesting results: > > > > Under my linux kernel 2.4.9-ac18 > > > > localhost:~/test/qs_bench > time ./qsbench -n 90000000 -p 1 -s 14538 > > seed = 14538 > > > > real 1m50.442s > > user 1m48.410s > > sys 0m1.660s > > > > And under windows with same parameters: > > seed = 14538 > > time = 48s > > > > -- > > seed = 14538 > > time = 47s > > > > -- > > seed = 14538 > > time = 48s > > > > May be this comparison is't correctly > > but so large difference! > > Any comments? > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" > > in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-10-15 6:17 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-10-11 8:45 qsbench on old kernels Lorenzo Allegrucci
2001-10-13 6:56 ` Stepan Kalichkin
[not found] ` <001301c153d2$ea1448c0$731086d4@aitjgumcdtb6u>
2001-10-15 6:18 ` Stepan Kalichkin
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®