Re: fork/exec performance?
Re: fork/exec performance?
- Subject: Re: fork/exec performance?
- From: Jim Magee <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 15:57:55 -0400
On Thursday, October 3, 2002, at 10:52 AM, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
FWIW, fork _used_ to be faster. I have some old lmbench numbers
laying around:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Mhz null null open selct sig sig fork
exec sh
call I/O stat clos TCP inst hndl proc
proc proc
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ----
---- ----
g4 Darwin 1.4 799 2.21 3.19 12.6 16.4 30.4 3.78 9.88 1576
4095 13.K
g4 Darwin 5.5 797 2.26 3.15 14.5 17.8 30.4 3.82 10.2 5685
12.K 40.K
g4.local. Darwin 6.0 797 1.47 2.73 17.2 20.7 27.2 3.00 10.5 7517
17.K 41.K
g4 Linux 2.4.18- 799 0.42 0.69 2.52 3.79 33.6 1.23 3.08 659.
2642 12.K
Interesting. My numbers don't show nearly the dramatic drop-off over
the releases that yours do:
Host OS Mhz null null open selct sig sig fork
exec sh
call I/O stat clos TCP inst hndl proc
proc proc
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ----
---- ----
jim Darwin 1.4 448 2.85 4.23 9.53 17 4.83 14 2402
6817 19K
jim.local Darwin 6.1 448 1.89 3.71 21 29 43 3.85 15 2832
8955 19K
And more interesting is that I am very familiar with what changed, and
nothing would explain going from 1576 to 7517. There seems to be
something dramatically different about our configurations. Can you
send me more info on your configuration (privately to avoid clogging
the list) and in particular, anything you can think of that might have
changed in your configuration between the time of the 1.4 numbers and
the 5.5 numbers?
When I track down what is going on there, I'll summarize to the list.
--Jim
_______________________________________________
darwin-kernel mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-kernel
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.