Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Bojan Rajkovic]

On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:

> 
> My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1  2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
> lion.   Here are the respective versions of mono:
> 
> Mono on OSX:
> 
> Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug  8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
> Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors. 
> www.mono-project.com
>   TLS: normal
>   SIGSEGV:   normal
>   Notification:   kqueue
>   Architecture:  x86
>   Disabled:none
>   Misc:   debugger softdebug 
>   LLVM:   yes(2.9svn-mono)
>   GC:  Included Boehm (with typed GC)
> 
> 
> Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
> 
> Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
> Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
>   TLS:   __thread
>   GC:Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
>   SIGSEGV:   altstack
>   Notifications: epoll
>   Architecture:  amd64
>   Disabled:  none
> 
> 
> Here is the  Mac OSX  mono 2.10.4 run:
> 
>   $ mono main.exe 
>   Running benchmark
>   struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
>   class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
> 
> Here is the  Ubuntu 11.04  mono 2.6.7 run:
> 
>   $ mono main.exe 
>   Running benchmark
>   struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
>   class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
> 
> Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono 2.10.4 on 
> the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of running on a VM). 
> The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC and the later is.   I 
> suspect given the consistent performance difference is *not* a GC issue, 
> rather a difference in the JIT code generation.
> 
> Let me know if there is other information I can provide.   Thanks.   
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore  
>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
>> application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the 
>> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
>> 
>>  mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX 
>> (same machine)
>> 
>> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>> 
>> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
>> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase 
>> and does not perform
>> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>> 
>> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on 
>> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>> 
>> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux 
>> and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.
>> 
>> Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this 
>> posting.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Jonathan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are running 
>> on?
>> 
>> slide
>> 
>> -- 
>> slide-o-blog
>> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/

Hi Jonathan, Slide

I suspect this is a difference between x86 and amd64 codegen. Mono on OS X is 
distributed as 32-bit only for now, though there is (somewhat-experimental) 
amd64/Darwin support in master. You can build it following the instructions at 
http://www.mono-project.com/Compiling_Mono_on_OSX. Try benchmarking that.

—Bojan___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Slide]

I just ran on ubuntu 64bit with mono 2.10.1 and got better numbers than your
2.6.7. I had to run somewhere quick but will publish the numbers when I get
back.
On Aug 27, 2011 11:16 AM, "Jonathan Shore"  wrote:
>
> My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX
lion. Here are the respective versions of mono:
>
> Mono on OSX:
>
> Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug 8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
> Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors.
www.mono-project.com
> TLS: normal
> SIGSEGV: normal
> Notification: kqueue
> Architecture: x86
> Disabled: none
> Misc: debugger softdebug
> LLVM: yes(2.9svn-mono)
> GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
>
>
> Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
>
> Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
> Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
> TLS: __thread
> GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
> SIGSEGV: altstack
> Notifications: epoll
> Architecture: amd64
> Disabled: none
>
>
> Here is the Mac OSX mono 2.10.4 run:
>
> $ mono main.exe
> Running benchmark
> struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
> class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
>
> Here is the Ubuntu 11.04 mono 2.6.7 run:
>
> $ mono main.exe
> Running benchmark
> struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
> class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
>
> Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono 2.10.4
on the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of running on a VM).
The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC and the later is. I
suspect given the consistent performance difference is *not* a GC issue,
rather a difference in the JIT code generation.
>
> Let me know if there is other information I can provide. Thanks.
>
> Jonathan
>
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore <
jonathan.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an
application that will generate millions of small objects). I was doing the
tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
>>
>> mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX (same
machine)
>>
>> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>>
>> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
>> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase
and does not perform
>> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>>
>> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+ on
both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>>
>> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that
linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or
better.
>>
>> Can someone clue me in? I've included the simple test code with this
posting.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are
running on?
>>
>> slide
>>
>> --
>> slide-o-blog
>> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/
>
___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Slide]

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an
> application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the
> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
>
> mono *2.6.7 was 4x faster* on my linux VM *than 2.10.4 *running on OSX
> (same machine)
>
> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>
> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase
> and does not perform
> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>
> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on
> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>
> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux
> and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.
>
> Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this
> posting.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jonathan
>
>

Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are running
on?

slide

-- 
slide-o-blog
http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/
___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

Here are the #s for ubuntu 11.4 on a core i7 box with different versions of 
mono.

Mono 2.6.7 (default Boehm GC)
struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 1.7 secs
class sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.5 secs

Mono 2.6.10 (default Boehm GC)
struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 1.7 secs
class sum: 589998356.48, time: 17.2 secs

Mono 2.6.10 (default Generational GC)
struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 1.7 secs
class sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.0 secs

The linux implementations seem to have the same performance across the 
struct-based benchmarks.   The default Boehm GC in 2.6.10 is about 2x slower 
than the implementation or parameters in 2.6.7.   Finally, the generational GC 
is more than 4x faster than the best Boehm GC time (for this trivial benchmark).

So I with gc=sgen, quite fine with the results.   I'm not sure if sgen is 
stable or not, but perhaps it should be the default on osx.   The osx 
performance is very poor (not shown here).


On Aug 27, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Rodrigo Kumpera wrote:

> There are a few points to note here.
> 
> Linux with the default GC is much faster than OSX since the laster can't use 
> fast object allocation.
> 
> OSX 2.6 shipped with default parallel mark enabled on OSX, but it was later 
> disabled due to bugs in boehm.
> 
> Given no one is actively working on boehm, this was the best option. My 
> suggestion is that you try using the new GC
> try running 2.10 with --gc=sgen. Performance will be substantially better for 
> your test.
>   
> 
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jonathan Shore  
> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
> application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the 
> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
> 
>   mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX 
> (same machine)
> 
> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
> 
> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase and 
> does not perform
> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
> 
> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on 
> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
> 
> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux 
> and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.
> 
> Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this 
> posting.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> 
> 

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

On Aug 27, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Rodrigo Kumpera wrote:

> There are a few points to note here.
> 
> Linux with the default GC is much faster than OSX since the laster can't use 
> fast object allocation.
> 
> OSX 2.6 shipped with default parallel mark enabled on OSX, but it was later 
> disabled due to bugs in boehm.
> 
> Given no one is actively working on boehm, this was the best option. My 
> suggestion is that you try using the new GC
> try running 2.10 with --gc=sgen. Performance will be substantially better for 
> your test.

Thanks for the pointer re: sgen.  sgen is dramatically faster.   I will also 
try this on linux.


___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

Rodrigo,

The class based object part of the test is definitely GC sensitive.  However, I 
and others have noted a performance drop for the struct based test (the other 
test in this simple benchmark), which should not be impacted by GC.   I did two 
tests of the struct-based approach, one with 2.6.x OSX and 2.10.x and there was 
a consistent difference.

I also have a linux box, so am trying to build 2.10.x (as the packages 
available are 2.6.x).   I expect, as others have found, that the struct 
performance will be lower in 2.10.x, even on linux.

I will post results later if I manage to build this successfully.

Jonathan

On Aug 27, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Rodrigo Kumpera wrote:

> There are a few points to note here.
> 
> Linux with the default GC is much faster than OSX since the laster can't use 
> fast object allocation.
> 
> OSX 2.6 shipped with default parallel mark enabled on OSX, but it was later 
> disabled due to bugs in boehm.
> 
> Given no one is actively working on boehm, this was the best option. My 
> suggestion is that you try using the new GC
> try running 2.10 with --gc=sgen. Performance will be substantially better for 
> your test.
>   
> 
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jonathan Shore  
> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
> application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the 
> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
> 
>   mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX 
> (same machine)
> 
> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
> 
> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase and 
> does not perform
> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
> 
> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on 
> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
> 
> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux 
> and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.
> 
> Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this 
> posting.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> 
> 

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Rodrigo Kumpera]

There are a few points to note here.

Linux with the default GC is much faster than OSX since the laster can't use
fast object allocation.

OSX 2.6 shipped with default parallel mark enabled on OSX, but it was later
disabled due to bugs in boehm.

Given no one is actively working on boehm, this was the best option. My
suggestion is that you try using the new GC
try running 2.10 with --gc=sgen. Performance will be substantially better
for your test.


On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an
> application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the
> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
>
> mono *2.6.7 was 4x faster* on my linux VM *than 2.10.4 *running on OSX
> (same machine)
>
> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>
> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase
> and does not perform
> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>
> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on
> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>
> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux
> and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.
>
> Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this
> posting.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> ___
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>
>
___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Stifu]

Follow-up:

Reminder, my results were:

Mono 2.6.3:
structs: just below 15 seconds
classes: just below 40 seconds

Mono 2.10.3:
structs: just above 19 seconds
classes: just above 40 seconds

And this is with Mono 2.8.1:
structs: just below 15 seconds
classes: just above 40 seconds

So structs are as fast in Mono 2.6 and 2.8 here, but classes are a tiny bit
slower in 2.8, the same as with Mono 2.10. Looking at my results only, you'd
think there were 2 regressions: classes got slower between 2.6 and 2.8, and
structs got slower between 2.8 and 2.10.


Jonathan Shore wrote:
> 
> I think all of these results point to a regression in performance between
> 2.10.x and 2.6.x.I ran the 2.6.x version on OSX and found it to be
> faster than 2.10.x.  
> 
> I will run on mu core i7 linux box and see how that fairs.
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 4:09 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Here's my results from 64-bit Mono master on OS X 10.7.1. The CPU is an
>> Intel Core i7 @ 2.0 GHz, with 8 GB of RAM backing it:
>> 
>> struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 1.593511 secs
>> class sum: 589998356.48, time: 14.413891 secs
>> 
>> Classes are almost twice as slow, which is somewhat odd.
>> 
>> —Bojan
>> 
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
>> 
>>> Ok.  When you have a chance can you indicate your marks & CPU?   I
>>> expect a reasonably modern CPU to be 2 - 6x fast than my sluggish cpu.  
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> So for instance my mac X5130 rates at 12.7 CINT 2006  vs  28.6  
>>> 
>>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Slide wrote:
>>> 
 I just ran on ubuntu 64bit with mono 2.10.1 and got better numbers than
 your 2.6.7. I had to run somewhere quick but will publish the numbers
 when I get back.
 
 On Aug 27, 2011 11:16 AM, "Jonathan Shore"
  wrote:
 > 
 > My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running
 OSX lion. Here are the respective versions of mono:
 > 
 > Mono on OSX:
 > 
 > Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug 8 22:03:39 EDT
 2011)
 > Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors.
 www.mono-project.com
 > TLS: normal
 > SIGSEGV: normal
 > Notification: kqueue
 > Architecture: x86
 > Disabled: none
 > Misc: debugger softdebug 
 > LLVM: yes(2.9svn-mono)
 > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
 > 
 > 
 > Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
 > 
 > Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
 > Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors.
 www.mono-project.com
 > TLS: __thread
 > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
 > SIGSEGV: altstack
 > Notifications: epoll
 > Architecture: amd64
 > Disabled: none
 > 
 > 
 > Here is the Mac OSX mono 2.10.4 run:
 > 
 > $ mono main.exe 
 > Running benchmark
 > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
 > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
 > 
 > Here is the Ubuntu 11.04 mono 2.6.7 run:
 > 
 > $ mono main.exe 
 > Running benchmark
 > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
 > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
 > 
 > Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono
 2.10.4 on the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of
 running on a VM). The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC
 and the later is. I suspect given the consistent performance difference
 is *not* a GC issue, rather a difference in the JIT code generation. 
 > 
 > Let me know if there is other information I can provide. Thanks. 
 > 
 > Jonathan
 > 
 > On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
 > 
 >> 
 >> 
 >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore
  wrote:
 >> Hi,
 >> 
 >> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I
 have an application that will generate millions of small objects). I
 was doing the tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the
 following:
 >> 
 >> mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX
 (same machine)
 >> 
 >> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
 >> 
 >> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
 >> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT
 codebase and does not perform
 >> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
 >> 
 >> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs
 -optimize+ on both environments as well as running the same exe on
 both.
 >> 
 >> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure
 that linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of
 2.6.7 or better.
 >> 
 >

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

I think all of these results point to a regression in performance between 
2.10.x and 2.6.x.I ran the 2.6.x version on OSX and found it to be faster 
than 2.10.x.  

I will run on mu core i7 linux box and see how that fairs.

On Aug 27, 2011, at 4:09 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Here's my results from 64-bit Mono master on OS X 10.7.1. The CPU is an Intel 
> Core i7 @ 2.0 GHz, with 8 GB of RAM backing it:
> 
> struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 1.593511 secs
> class sum: 589998356.48, time: 14.413891 secs
> 
> Classes are almost twice as slow, which is somewhat odd.
> 
> —Bojan
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
> 
>> Ok.  When you have a chance can you indicate your marks & CPU?   I expect a 
>> reasonably modern CPU to be 2 - 6x fast than my sluggish cpu.   Thanks.
>> 
>> 
>> So for instance my mac X5130 rates at 12.7 CINT 2006  vs  28.6  
>> 
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Slide wrote:
>> 
>>> I just ran on ubuntu 64bit with mono 2.10.1 and got better numbers than 
>>> your 2.6.7. I had to run somewhere quick but will publish the numbers when 
>>> I get back.
>>> 
>>> On Aug 27, 2011 11:16 AM, "Jonathan Shore"  wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
>>> > lion. Here are the respective versions of mono:
>>> > 
>>> > Mono on OSX:
>>> > 
>>> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug 8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
>>> > Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors. 
>>> > www.mono-project.com
>>> > TLS: normal
>>> > SIGSEGV: normal
>>> > Notification: kqueue
>>> > Architecture: x86
>>> > Disabled: none
>>> > Misc: debugger softdebug 
>>> > LLVM: yes(2.9svn-mono)
>>> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
>>> > 
>>> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
>>> > Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
>>> > TLS: __thread
>>> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
>>> > SIGSEGV: altstack
>>> > Notifications: epoll
>>> > Architecture: amd64
>>> > Disabled: none
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > Here is the Mac OSX mono 2.10.4 run:
>>> > 
>>> > $ mono main.exe 
>>> > Running benchmark
>>> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
>>> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
>>> > 
>>> > Here is the Ubuntu 11.04 mono 2.6.7 run:
>>> > 
>>> > $ mono main.exe 
>>> > Running benchmark
>>> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
>>> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
>>> > 
>>> > Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono 2.10.4 
>>> > on the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of running on a 
>>> > VM). The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC and the later 
>>> > is. I suspect given the consistent performance difference is *not* a GC 
>>> > issue, rather a difference in the JIT code generation. 
>>> > 
>>> > Let me know if there is other information I can provide. Thanks. 
>>> > 
>>> > Jonathan
>>> > 
>>> > On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
>>> > 
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore 
>>> >>  wrote:
>>> >> Hi,
>>> >> 
>>> >> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
>>> >> application that will generate millions of small objects). I was doing 
>>> >> the tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
>>> >> 
>>> >> mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX (same 
>>> >> machine)
>>> >> 
>>> >> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>>> >> 
>>> >> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
>>> >> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT 
>>> >> codebase and does not perform
>>> >> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>>> >> 
>>> >> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+ on 
>>> >> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>>> >> 
>>> >> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that 
>>> >> linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 
>>> >> or better.
>>> >> 
>>> >> Can someone clue me in? I've included the simple test code with this 
>>> >> posting.
>>> >> 
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >> 
>>> >> Jonathan
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >> 
>>> >> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are 
>>> >> running on?
>>> >> 
>>> >> slide
>>> >> 
>>> >> -- 
>>> >> slide-o-blog
>>> >> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/
>>> > 
>> 
>> ___
>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> 

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Bojan Rajkovic]

Hi all,

Here's my results from 64-bit Mono master on OS X 10.7.1. The CPU is an Intel 
Core i7 @ 2.0 GHz, with 8 GB of RAM backing it:

struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 1.593511 secs
class sum: 589998356.48, time: 14.413891 secs

Classes are almost twice as slow, which is somewhat odd.

—Bojan

On Aug 27, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:

> Ok.  When you have a chance can you indicate your marks & CPU?   I expect a 
> reasonably modern CPU to be 2 - 6x fast than my sluggish cpu.   Thanks.
> 
> 
> So for instance my mac X5130 rates at 12.7 CINT 2006  vs  28.6  
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Slide wrote:
> 
>> I just ran on ubuntu 64bit with mono 2.10.1 and got better numbers than your 
>> 2.6.7. I had to run somewhere quick but will publish the numbers when I get 
>> back.
>> 
>> On Aug 27, 2011 11:16 AM, "Jonathan Shore"  wrote:
>> > 
>> > My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
>> > lion. Here are the respective versions of mono:
>> > 
>> > Mono on OSX:
>> > 
>> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug 8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
>> > Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors. 
>> > www.mono-project.com
>> > TLS: normal
>> > SIGSEGV: normal
>> > Notification: kqueue
>> > Architecture: x86
>> > Disabled: none
>> > Misc: debugger softdebug 
>> > LLVM: yes(2.9svn-mono)
>> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
>> > 
>> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
>> > Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
>> > TLS: __thread
>> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
>> > SIGSEGV: altstack
>> > Notifications: epoll
>> > Architecture: amd64
>> > Disabled: none
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Here is the Mac OSX mono 2.10.4 run:
>> > 
>> > $ mono main.exe 
>> > Running benchmark
>> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
>> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
>> > 
>> > Here is the Ubuntu 11.04 mono 2.6.7 run:
>> > 
>> > $ mono main.exe 
>> > Running benchmark
>> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
>> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
>> > 
>> > Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono 2.10.4 
>> > on the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of running on a 
>> > VM). The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC and the later 
>> > is. I suspect given the consistent performance difference is *not* a GC 
>> > issue, rather a difference in the JIT code generation. 
>> > 
>> > Let me know if there is other information I can provide. Thanks. 
>> > 
>> > Jonathan
>> > 
>> > On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
>> > 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore 
>> >>  wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> 
>> >> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
>> >> application that will generate millions of small objects). I was doing 
>> >> the tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
>> >> 
>> >> mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX (same 
>> >> machine)
>> >> 
>> >> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>> >> 
>> >> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
>> >> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase 
>> >> and does not perform
>> >> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>> >> 
>> >> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+ on 
>> >> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>> >> 
>> >> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that 
>> >> linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 
>> >> or better.
>> >> 
>> >> Can someone clue me in? I've included the simple test code with this 
>> >> posting.
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks
>> >> 
>> >> Jonathan
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are 
>> >> running on?
>> >> 
>> >> slide
>> >> 
>> >> -- 
>> >> slide-o-blog
>> >> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/
>> > 
> 
> ___
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Pobst]

You could probably install the Mac OSX 2.6.7 Mono pretty quickly to see 
if it's a difference caused by architectures or by a change between Mono 
versions.

http://www.go-mono.com/mono-downloads/download.html

Jonathan


On 8/27/2011 2:36 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
> Ok. When you have a chance can you indicate your marks & CPU? I expect a
> reasonably modern CPU to be 2 - 6x fast than my sluggish cpu. Thanks.
>
>
> So for instance my mac X5130 rates at 12.7 CINT 2006 vs 28.6
>
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Slide wrote:
>
>> I just ran on ubuntu 64bit with mono 2.10.1 and got better numbers
>> than your 2.6.7. I had to run somewhere quick but will publish the
>> numbers when I get back.
>>
>> On Aug 27, 2011 11:16 AM, "Jonathan Shore" > > wrote:
>> >
>> > My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running
>> OSX lion. Here are the respective versions of mono:
>> >
>> > Mono on OSX:
>> >
>> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug 8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
>> > Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors.
>> www.mono-project.com 
>> > TLS: normal
>> > SIGSEGV: normal
>> > Notification: kqueue
>> > Architecture: x86
>> > Disabled: none
>> > Misc: debugger softdebug
>> > LLVM: yes(2.9svn-mono)
>> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
>> >
>> >
>> > Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
>> >
>> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
>> > Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors.
>> www.mono-project.com 
>> > TLS: __thread
>> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
>> > SIGSEGV: altstack
>> > Notifications: epoll
>> > Architecture: amd64
>> > Disabled: none
>> >
>> >
>> > Here is the Mac OSX mono 2.10.4 run:
>> >
>> > $ mono main.exe
>> > Running benchmark
>> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
>> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
>> >
>> > Here is the Ubuntu 11.04 mono 2.6.7 run:
>> >
>> > $ mono main.exe
>> > Running benchmark
>> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
>> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
>> >
>> > Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono
>> 2.10.4 on the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of
>> running on a VM). The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC
>> and the later is. I suspect given the consistent performance
>> difference is *not* a GC issue, rather a difference in the JIT code
>> generation.
>> >
>> > Let me know if there is other information I can provide. Thanks.
>> >
>> > Jonathan
>> >
>> > On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore
>> mailto:jonathan.sh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I
>> have an application that will generate millions of small objects). I
>> was doing the tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the
>> following:
>> >>
>> >> mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX
>> (same machine)
>> >>
>> >> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
>> >>
>> >> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
>> >> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT
>> codebase and does not perform
>> >> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
>> >>
>> >> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs
>> -optimize+ on both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
>> >>
>> >> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure
>> that linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of
>> 2.6.7 or better.
>> >>
>> >> Can someone clue me in? I've included the simple test code with
>> this posting.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Jonathan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you
>> are running on?
>> >>
>> >> slide
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> slide-o-blog
>> >> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/
>> >
>
>
>
> ___
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Stifu]

Here are my results when running your benchmark.
My PC: a very old a cheap Windows XP Celeron.
I compiled the application with .NET, and ran it with Mono.
I ran the benchmark 3 times to make sure results were reliable.

Mono 2.6.3:
structs: just below 15 seconds
classes: just below 40 seconds

Mono 2.10.3:
structs: just above 19 seconds
classes: just above 40 seconds

So classes are a tiny bit slower, and structs are a fair bit slower.


Jonathan Shore wrote:
> 
> I guess the code was trimmed off in the mailer (I sent in the initial
> note).  Here it is inlined as text:
> 
> 
> using System;
> 
> namespace TestHeap
> {
>   
>   public interface IDatum
>   {
>   longTimestamp   {  get; }
>   }
>   
>   
>   public struct SDelta : IDatum
>   {
>   public SDelta (long timestamp, long id, double size, double 
> price,
> double maxsize = 0)
>   {
>   _timestamp = timestamp;
>   _id = id;
>   _size = size;
>   _price = price;
>   _maxsize = maxsize;
>   }
>   
>   
>   // Properties
>   
>   
>   public long Timestamp
>   {  get { return _timestamp; } }
>   
>   public long Id
>   {  get { return _id; } }
>   
>   public double Size 
>   {  get { return _size; } }
>   
>   public double Price
>   {  get { return _price; } }
>   
>   public double MaxSize
>   {  get { return _maxsize; } }
>   
>   
>   // Variables
>   
>   private long_timestamp;
>   private long_id;
>   private double  _size;
>   private double  _price;
>   private double  _maxsize;
>   }
>   
>   
>   public class CDelta : IDatum
>   {
>   public CDelta (long timestamp, long id, double size, double 
> price,
> double maxsize = 0)
>   {
>   _timestamp = timestamp;
>   _id = id;
>   _size = size;
>   _price = price;
>   _maxsize = maxsize;
>   }
>   
>   
>   // Properties
>   
>   
>   public long Timestamp
>   {  get { return _timestamp; } }
>   
>   public long Id
>   {  get { return _id; } }
>   
>   public double Size 
>   {  get { return _size; } }
>   
>   public double Price
>   {  get { return _price; } }
>   
>   public double MaxSize
>   {  get { return _maxsize; } }
>   
>   
>   // Variables
>   
>   private long_timestamp;
>   private long_id;
>   private double  _size;
>   private double  _price;
>   private double  _maxsize;
>   }
> 
>   class MainClass
>   {
>   private static SDelta f (int i)
>   {
>   return new SDelta (i*1000, i, 1e6, 1.400 + i / 1000);
>   }
> 
>   private static CDelta g (int i)
>   {
>   return new CDelta (i*1000, i, 1e6, 1.400 + i / 1000);
>   }
> 
>   
>   public static void Main (string[] args)
>   {
>   Console.WriteLine ("Running benchmark");
> 
>   // struct test
>   long Tnow1 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
>   
>   double sum1 = 0;
>   for (int i = 0 ; i < 1 ; i++)
>   sum1 += f(i).Price;
> 
>   long Tend1 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
> 
>   // class test
>   long Tnow2 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
>   
>   double sum2 = 0;
>   for (int i = 0 ; i < 1 ; i++)
>   sum2 += g(i).Price;
> 
>   long Tend2 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
> 
>   
>   Console.WriteLine ("struct sum: " + sum1 + ", time: " + 
> ((Tend1 -
> Tnow1) / 1e7) + " secs");
>   Console.WriteLine ("class sum: " + sum2 + ", time: " + 
> ((Tend2 - Tnow2)
> / 1e7) + " secs");
>   }
>   }
> }
> 
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Aug 27, 2011, a

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

Ok.  When you have a chance can you indicate your marks & CPU?   I expect a 
reasonably modern CPU to be 2 - 6x fast than my sluggish cpu.   Thanks.


So for instance my mac X5130 rates at 12.7 CINT 2006  vs  28.6  

On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Slide wrote:

> I just ran on ubuntu 64bit with mono 2.10.1 and got better numbers than your 
> 2.6.7. I had to run somewhere quick but will publish the numbers when I get 
> back.
> 
> On Aug 27, 2011 11:16 AM, "Jonathan Shore"  wrote:
> > 
> > My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
> > lion. Here are the respective versions of mono:
> > 
> > Mono on OSX:
> > 
> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug 8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
> > Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors. 
> > www.mono-project.com
> > TLS: normal
> > SIGSEGV: normal
> > Notification: kqueue
> > Architecture: x86
> > Disabled: none
> > Misc: debugger softdebug 
> > LLVM: yes(2.9svn-mono)
> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
> > 
> > 
> > Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):
> > 
> > Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
> > Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
> > TLS: __thread
> > GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
> > SIGSEGV: altstack
> > Notifications: epoll
> > Architecture: amd64
> > Disabled: none
> > 
> > 
> > Here is the Mac OSX mono 2.10.4 run:
> > 
> > $ mono main.exe 
> > Running benchmark
> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs
> > 
> > Here is the Ubuntu 11.04 mono 2.6.7 run:
> > 
> > $ mono main.exe 
> > Running benchmark
> > struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
> > class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs
> > 
> > Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono 2.10.4 on 
> > the same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of running on a VM). 
> > The struct test is most likely not exercising the GC and the later is. I 
> > suspect given the consistent performance difference is *not* a GC issue, 
> > rather a difference in the JIT code generation. 
> > 
> > Let me know if there is other information I can provide. Thanks. 
> > 
> > Jonathan
> > 
> > On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore 
> >>  wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
> >> application that will generate millions of small objects). I was doing the 
> >> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
> >> 
> >> mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX (same 
> >> machine)
> >> 
> >> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
> >> 
> >> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
> >> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase 
> >> and does not perform
> >> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
> >> 
> >> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+ on 
> >> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
> >> 
> >> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that 
> >> linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or 
> >> better.
> >> 
> >> Can someone clue me in? I've included the simple test code with this 
> >> posting.
> >> 
> >> Thanks
> >> 
> >> Jonathan
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are 
> >> running on?
> >> 
> >> slide
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> slide-o-blog
> >> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/
> > 

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

I guess the code was trimmed off in the mailer (I sent in the initial note).  
Here it is inlined as text:


using System;

namespace TestHeap
{

public interface IDatum
{
longTimestamp   {  get; }
}


public struct SDelta : IDatum
{
public SDelta (long timestamp, long id, double size, double 
price, double maxsize = 0)
{
_timestamp = timestamp;
_id = id;
_size = size;
_price = price;
_maxsize = maxsize;
}


// Properties


public long Timestamp
{  get { return _timestamp; } }

public long Id
{  get { return _id; } }

public double Size 
{  get { return _size; } }

public double Price
{  get { return _price; } }

public double MaxSize
{  get { return _maxsize; } }


// Variables

private long_timestamp;
private long_id;
private double  _size;
private double  _price;
private double  _maxsize;
}


public class CDelta : IDatum
{
public CDelta (long timestamp, long id, double size, double 
price, double maxsize = 0)
{
_timestamp = timestamp;
_id = id;
_size = size;
_price = price;
_maxsize = maxsize;
}


// Properties


public long Timestamp
{  get { return _timestamp; } }

public long Id
{  get { return _id; } }

public double Size 
{  get { return _size; } }

public double Price
{  get { return _price; } }

public double MaxSize
{  get { return _maxsize; } }


// Variables

private long_timestamp;
private long_id;
private double  _size;
private double  _price;
private double  _maxsize;
}

class MainClass
{
private static SDelta f (int i)
{
return new SDelta (i*1000, i, 1e6, 1.400 + i / 1000);
}

private static CDelta g (int i)
{
return new CDelta (i*1000, i, 1e6, 1.400 + i / 1000);
}


public static void Main (string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine ("Running benchmark");

// struct test
long Tnow1 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;

double sum1 = 0;
for (int i = 0 ; i < 1 ; i++)
sum1 += f(i).Price;

long Tend1 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;

// class test
long Tnow2 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;

double sum2 = 0;
for (int i = 0 ; i < 1 ; i++)
sum2 += g(i).Price;

long Tend2 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;


Console.WriteLine ("struct sum: " + sum1 + ", time: " + 
((Tend1 - Tnow1) / 1e7) + " secs");
Console.WriteLine ("class sum: " + sum2 + ", time: " + 
((Tend2 - Tnow2) / 1e7) + " secs");
}
}
}


On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:

> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:20 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:
>> 
>>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
>>> 
 
 My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1  2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
 lion.   Here are the respective versions of mono:
>> 
>> Would 32 vs 64 really make that much of a difference?   I have used 32 bit C 
>> applications without any noticable perf difference.
>> 
>> I am worried that there may also be a problem with 2.10.x on other 
>> platforms.   It would put my mind at ease if this is just a OSX 
>> 

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Bojan Rajkovic]

On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:

> 
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:20 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1  2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
>>> lion.   Here are the respective versions of mono:
> 
> Would 32 vs 64 really make that much of a difference?   I have used 32 bit C 
> applications without any noticable perf difference.
> 
> I am worried that there may also be a problem with 2.10.x on other platforms. 
>   It would put my mind at ease if this is just a OSX implementation issue.
> 
> I don't know if I can reasonably install both 2.6.x and 2.10.x on linux 
> without hand compiling and doing some magic in config.Would be nice to 
> know that this "benchmark" performs the same or better from 2.6 to 2.10.
> 
> Jonathan

Might make a difference with respect to performance if your struct can fit in 
the registers on 64-bit, but cannot on 32-bit. :-) If you could post your 
benchmark code, more people could test.

—Bojan

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:20 PM, Bojan Rajkovic wrote:

> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Jonathan Shore wrote:
> 
>> 
>> My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1  2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX 
>> lion.   Here are the respective versions of mono:

Would 32 vs 64 really make that much of a difference?   I have used 32 bit C 
applications without any noticable perf difference.

I am worried that there may also be a problem with 2.10.x on other platforms.   
It would put my mind at ease if this is just a OSX implementation issue.

I don't know if I can reasonably install both 2.6.x and 2.10.x on linux without 
hand compiling and doing some magic in config.Would be nice to know that 
this "benchmark" performs the same or better from 2.6 to 2.10.

Jonathan 
___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

Re: [Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

My machine is an old 2006 Mac Pro 1,1  2 x Xeon 5130 (64 bit) running OSX lion. 
  Here are the respective versions of mono:

Mono on OSX:

Mono JIT compiler version 2.10.4 (tarball Mon Aug  8 22:03:39 EDT 2011)
Copyright (C) 2002-2011 Novell, Inc, Xamarin, Inc and Contributors. 
www.mono-project.com
TLS: normal
SIGSEGV:   normal
Notification:   kqueue
Architecture:  x86
Disabled:none
Misc:   debugger softdebug 
LLVM:   yes(2.9svn-mono)
GC:  Included Boehm (with typed GC)


Mono on Ubuntu 11.04 (running in VMWare VM on same machine):

Mono JIT compiler version 2.6.7 (Debian 2.6.7-5ubuntu3)
Copyright (C) 2002-2010 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
TLS:   __thread
GC:Included Boehm (with typed GC and Parallel Mark)
SIGSEGV:   altstack
Notifications: epoll
Architecture:  amd64
Disabled:  none


Here is the  Mac OSX  mono 2.10.4 run:

$ mono main.exe 
Running benchmark
struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 9.010549 secs
class sum: 589998356.48, time: 30.67357 secs

Here is the  Ubuntu 11.04  mono 2.6.7 run:

$ mono main.exe 
Running benchmark
struct sum: 589998356.48, time: 2.737732 secs
class sum: 589998356.48, time: 7.83984 secs

Note that the running time for mono 2.6.7 is ~4x faster than mono 2.10.4 on the 
same box (and the linux run has the disadvantage of running on a VM). The 
struct test is most likely not exercising the GC and the later is.   I suspect 
given the consistent performance difference is *not* a GC issue, rather a 
difference in the JIT code generation.

Let me know if there is other information I can provide.   Thanks.   

Jonathan

On Aug 27, 2011, at 1:52 PM, Slide wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Shore  
> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an 
> application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the 
> tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:
> 
>   mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX 
> (same machine)
> 
> I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:
> 
> - performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7
> - mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase and 
> does not perform
> - difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)
> 
> Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on 
> both environments as well as running the same exe on both.
> 
> I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux 
> and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.
> 
> Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this 
> posting.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> Can you publish your benchmark numbers and for what machines you are running 
> on?
> 
> slide
> 
> -- 
> slide-o-blog
> http://slide-o-blog.blogspot.com/

___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

[Mono-dev] substantial performance regression between 2.10 and 2.6 or impl diff?

[Jonathan Shore]

Hi,I was doing some benchmarks of struct vs class based creation (I have an application that will generate millions of small objects).   I was doing the tests in a ubuntu 11.4 VM on my mac pro and found the following:	mono 2.6.7 was 4x faster on my linux VM than 2.10.4 running on OSX (same machine)I don't know whether this may be because of one of the following:- performance in 2.10.4 regressed vs 2.6.7- mono JIT implementation for OSX has a completely different JiT codebase and does not perform- difference in GC (only relevant for second part of the test)Note that I tried this with separate compilations with mcs -optimize+  on both environments as well as running the same exe on both.I can live with slower performance on OSX, but want to make sure that linux and windows versions of mono 2.10.x have the performance of 2.6.7 or better.Can someone clue me in?   I've included the simple test code with this posting.ThanksJonathan

Main.cs
Description: Binary data
___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list