Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Aaron Mason simplersolut...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Andres Salazar ndrsslz...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Bret S. Lambert bret.lamb...@gmail.com wrote: ... Setting the controller to AHCI would give OpenBSD access to NCQ where available, but the driver would also have to be written to take advantage of this I would imagine. There would also have to *be* a driver for the controller, which wouldn't be needed if it's being run in legacy mode (IDE emulation essentially). If your hard drive comes up as wd0, it's set in Legacy mode. If it's sd0, it's in SATA/RAID/AHCI mode (dependant on manufacturer). Where one would find documentation that tells one which drivers support NCQ and which don't? Does the sili dirver support NCQ? sII3512 is supported by pciide, and not by the sili driver (drive gets detected wd0, it's a SATA 1), while sii3124 is handled by the sili driver, but the man page doesn't mention NCQ (this card supports it). Thanks.
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Andres Salazar ndrsslz...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I dont have obj on ram, or /tmp . Iam using make build. Use gentoo? Thank you Andres On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:48 AM, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:02:37AM -0600, Andres Salazar wrote: Hello, Iam confused on the different result I get when I compile userland on any machine better then a Dual Core 2.5Ghz 2GB RAM 160GB 7200 SATA / SATA ii You're not even telling us how you compile userland. How should we help ? is your obj in ram ? your tmp in ram ? are you building with make build ? make -j4 build ? something else ?
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
Hello, Iam confused on the different result I get when I compile userland on any machine better then a Dual Core 2.5Ghz 2GB RAM 160GB 7200 SATA / SATA ii On some machines I get a compile time of 45min, other machines 30min.. and the best of the case I get 30min. Sometimes that machine that takes 45min is far better hardware then a DualCore, in this case a QuadCore with SATA II/sata... Iam going to use these machines for database and Iam very concerned about these results Based on that I have this question: Is it normal that this varies so much? (Afterall a variation from 35min to 45min represents an increase of about %25 less efficiency!!) Is there a better way to benchmark the IO of a Hard Disk on OpenBSD , what should be the normal of a hard disk scanned as sd SATA/ SATA II with similar CPU/RAM as mentioned? Andres Hi! You didn't provide too many details. Based on that it could be any of the following: Different CPU (Intel vs. AMD, CPU generations, amount of CPU cache...) Different FSB Different memory setup or technology (integrated vs. on-board memory, controller single-channel vs. dual-channel vs. triple-channel, DDR vs. DDR2 vs. DDR3, ECC vs. noECC, buffered vs. unbuffered, memory speed or timings, ...) Different I/O or SATA controller Different chipset Misconfiguration (BIOS, OS, HDD, ...) Different HDD (platter density, RPM, HDD cache, manufacturer, ...) HDD layout (beginning vs. the end of disk) and probably a ton of others I didn't think of. How much, if at all, should any of these matter? No idea, you tell us :) Regards, Daniel.
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:02:37AM -0600, Andres Salazar wrote: Hello, Iam confused on the different result I get when I compile userland on any machine better then a Dual Core 2.5Ghz 2GB RAM 160GB 7200 SATA / SATA ii You're not even telling us how you compile userland. How should we help ? is your obj in ram ? your tmp in ram ? are you building with make build ? make -j4 build ? something else ?
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
Hello, I dont have obj on ram, or /tmp . Iam using make build. Thank you Andres On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:48 AM, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:02:37AM -0600, Andres Salazar wrote: Hello, Iam confused on the different result I get when I compile userland on any machine better then a Dual Core 2.5Ghz 2GB RAM 160GB 7200 SATA / SATA ii You're not even telling us how you compile userland. How should we help ? is your obj in ram ? your tmp in ram ? are you building with make build ? make -j4 build ? something else ?
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 09:27:36AM -0600, Andres Salazar wrote: Hello, I dont have obj on ram, or /tmp . Iam using make build. Thank you Andres On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 5:48 AM, Marc Espie es...@nerim.net wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:02:37AM -0600, Andres Salazar wrote: Hello, Iam confused on the different result I get when I compile userland on any machine better then a Dual Core 2.5Ghz 2GB RAM 160GB 7200 SATA / SATA ii You're not even telling us how you compile userland. How should we help ? is your obj in ram ? your tmp in ram ? are you building with make build ? make -j4 build ? something else ? Well, /tmp in RAM is going to make a big difference. And src/ is mostly parallel-clean. There's an unlikely race in perl, but otherwise make -jN build is going to go ~N times as fast on an n-core SMP system.
Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
Hello, Iam confused on the different result I get when I compile userland on any machine better then a Dual Core 2.5Ghz 2GB RAM 160GB 7200 SATA / SATA ii On some machines I get a compile time of 45min, other machines 30min.. and the best of the case I get 30min. Sometimes that machine that takes 45min is far better hardware then a DualCore, in this case a QuadCore with SATA II/sata... Iam going to use these machines for database and Iam very concerned about these results Based on that I have this question: Is it normal that this varies so much? (Afterall a variation from 35min to 45min represents an increase of about %25 less efficiency!!) Is there a better way to benchmark the IO of a Hard Disk on OpenBSD , what should be the normal of a hard disk scanned as sd SATA/ SATA II with similar CPU/RAM as mentioned? Andres
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
Iam going to use these machines for database and Iam very concerned about these results Honestly, you'd do better asking that on a list dedicated to whatever database you're going to be running. In addition to helping you choose hardware to fit your needs, they'll totally pimp your configs, too.
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Bret S. Lambert bret.lamb...@gmail.com wrote: Iam going to use these machines for database and Iam very concerned about these results Honestly, you'd do better asking that on a list dedicated to whatever database you're going to be running. In addition to helping you choose hardware to fit your needs, they'll totally pimp your configs, too. Thanks, it will still be interested then to know what the avergae userland compilation is on similar hardware? Also any standard way of benchmarking IO on openbsd? Thanks Andres
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On 2/28/2010 12:02 PM, Andres Salazar wrote: On some machines I get a compile time of 45min, other machines 30min.. and the best of the case I get 30min. Sometimes that machine that takes 45min is far better hardware then a DualCore, in this case a QuadCore with SATA II/sata... None of us will likely be able to tell you why, you'll have to figure out what part is the bottleneck in your setup, assuming you have identical configurations software-wise. (softep? Partition layout? Version?) I don't know if building userland will take advantage of multiple CPUs, so if your quad has slower cores than your dual, that might be a big hint. Iam going to use these machines for database and Iam very concerned about these results These results will be largely irrelevant for your database load. However, learning how to use the available tools to find the bottleneck will be useful in finding the bottlenecks in your database system. Is there a better way to benchmark the IO of a Hard Disk on OpenBSD , what should be the normal of a hard disk scanned as sd SATA/ SATA II with similar CPU/RAM as mentioned? The best way to benchmark the I/O will be to set up your database with some clients and run your workload. Otherwise, you'll spend your time finding the fastest disk subsystem, only to discover that wasn't your bottleneck anyway.
Re: Average time for compiling userland? == benchmarking CPU/IO? best result for database hosting?
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Andres Salazar ndrsslz...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Bret S. Lambert bret.lamb...@gmail.com wrote: Iam going to use these machines for database and Iam very concerned about these results Honestly, you'd do better asking that on a list dedicated to whatever database you're going to be running. In addition to helping you choose hardware to fit your needs, they'll totally pimp your configs, too. Thanks, it will still be interested then to know what the avergae userland compilation is on similar hardware? Also any standard way of benchmarking IO on openbsd? Thanks Andres I would say it's probably bottlenecking on disk I/O based on what you're telling me. The quad core could have a shitty SATA chipset in it, causing poor I/O scores. If the times stop at 30 mins, it's probably the SATA controller that's reached its limit. Setting the controller to AHCI would give OpenBSD access to NCQ where available, but the driver would also have to be written to take advantage of this I would imagine. There would also have to *be* a driver for the controller, which wouldn't be needed if it's being run in legacy mode (IDE emulation essentially). If your hard drive comes up as wd0, it's set in Legacy mode. If it's sd0, it's in SATA/RAID/AHCI mode (dependant on manufacturer). -- Aaron Mason - Programmer, open source addict I've taken my software vows - for beta or for worse
