Am 02.02.2006 um 10:48 schrieb Bernd Eidenschink:
Hi Zoran,
Am Donnerstag, 2. Februar 2006 10:01 schrieb Zoran Vasiljevic:
Am 01.02.2006 um 17:15 schrieb Vlad Seryakov:
On my machine with tcl 8.4.12
starting 10 malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 16003 usec
starting 10 ns_malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 13207
usec
I've been trying to see why I'm getting worse values with ns_malloc
as with malloc and it turned out to be that only in 2+CPU box I was
able to get ns_malloc outperform the malloc. On all single-cpu boxes
the times were 2 up to 4 times better with plain malloc!
Single-CPU-box, Tcl 8.4.12; SuSE w/ Kernel 2.6.13-15.7-default.
starting 10 malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 36667 usec
starting 10 ns_malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 16620
usec
Does anybody have a single AND multi-cpu box to try out?
Hyperthreading, but the Kernel sees 2 CPUs:
(Same compilation of NaviServer; Kernel 2.6.13-15.7-smp)
starting 10 malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 13018 usec
starting 10 ns_malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 10599
usec
Damn, I still cannot believe...
Can you download the:
http://www.archiware.com/www/downloads/memtest.c
and compile:
gcc -o memtest memtest.c -I/usr/local/include -L/usr/local/lib -
ltcl8.4g
or (for Tcl w/o symbols)
gcc -o memtest memtest.c -I/usr/local/include -L/usr/local/lib -
ltcl8.4
and give it a try on both machines?
This is what I get on single-cpu:
Tcl: 8.4.12
starting 16 malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 94103 usec
starting 16 ckalloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 243616 usec
and on 2CPU:
Tcl: 8.4.12
starting 16 malloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 435068 usec
starting 16 ckalloc threads...waiting....done: 0 seconds, 151250 usec
Both are Mac OSX boxes. The single CPU is a 1.5GHz Mac Mini and the 2CPU
is a G4 with 2x800Mhz PowerPC.
