We also need to track *precisely* what is being tested.
SVN rev #, any patches, configuration (params) and of course,
platform/OS run on.
geir
Egor Pasko wrote:
On the 0x22A day of Apache Harmony Vladimir Strigun wrote:
The numbers that I published was received on P4 under Windows +
server.emconf +Harmony-1980. Unfortunately I haven't run Dacapo under
x86_64, but I hope we could receive almost the same range (10-20 %
slower that Sun) with the mentioned configuration.
And Sun was running with "-server" too I guess? :)
Maybe, it is time to track performance comparisons of *different
platforms* in one place? That should help to avoid major differences in
our visions for harmony performance.
* Melody
* marmonytest.org
* Robin's site
* wiki (just for the start, maybe)
Thanks,
Vladimir.
On 11/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I reviewed - looks like Robin is seeing DRLVM get an aggregate
performance of about 35% of whatever he's measuring against.
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Sergey Kuksenko wrote:
Lets do the simplest thing fist. :)
We can do it. We only need to specify a set of workloads.
I've tried running dacapo with 10 warming stages and we are constantly
around 25% speed against the leading JVM (which is always sun5 or
sun6),
bea5 is around 80% and ibm5 is around 70%, I'll have more detailed
results shortly.
I don't understand this at all. It wasn't but a few weeks ago when
someone was reporting decapo numbers that ranged from 90% of Sun5 to
110% of Sun5.
on x86_64?
That's true. It was x86.
But the numbers that Robin is reporting aren't great either, are they?
geir
