Re: strange differencies: find -exec \+ vs find | xargs

Hi dennis berger! On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:14:32 +0200; dennis berger wrote about 'Re: strange differencies: find -exec \+ vs find | xargs': > Am 15.06.2011 um 12:33 schrieb Vadim Goncharov: >> Hi, >> >> There was a flamewar in a local maillist about the fastes

strange differencies: find -exec \+ vs find | xargs

,30s system 20% cpu 12:14,49 total kernblitz:/home/vadim# time find /warehouse/garbage -type f -print0 | xargs -0 chmod 644 find /warehouse/garbage -type f -print0 6,58s user 70,84s system 35% cpu 3:36,67 total xargs -0 chmod 644 3,93s user 59,30s system 28% cpu 3:39,50 total --

Re: pf nat & ipfw kernel nat & ng_nat - what uses less computer resources?

ddress (all three use the same underlying libalias, so even for different implementations techniques are valid). -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nucli...@mail.ru [Moderator of RU.ANTI-ECOLOGY][FreeBSD][http://antigreen.org][LJ:/nuclight]

Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool

ich is 1200+ lines long and want to know which parts are most hogs. But that part of your patch which is for pmcstat isn't applying to 6.4 :( Could you please provide another for this ver? -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:[EMAI

Re: hwpmc granularity and 6.4 network performance

>> 4 bytes, I assume that it has a sample for each of 4-byte chunks of binary >> code, so that it must have such information. My kernel is compiled with: >> >> makeoptions DEBUG=-g >> >> so kgdb does know where are instructions for each line of source code.

hwpmc granularity and 6.4 network performance

ormation. My kernel is compiled with: makeoptions DEBUG=-g so kgdb does know where are instructions for each line of source code. How can I obtain this info from profiling? It also would be useful to know which places do calls to that bcmp() and rn_match(). -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#1668521

Re: interface aliases - not so curious

22.02.08 @ 12:18 Niki Denev wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Vadim Goncharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi! After looking at humorous quoting about a man trying to ban unused addresses in his network by putting 65535 ifcong_XXX_aliasYYY lines to rc.conf, I decided to chec

[curious] interface aliases changing performance

ig.sh: starting net 250 @ 416 sec ./evil_ifconfig.sh: starting net 251 @ 416 sec ./evil_ifconfig.sh: starting net 252 @ 416 sec ./evil_ifconfig.sh: starting net 253 @ 416 sec ./evil_ifconfig.sh: starting net 254 @ 416 sec ./evil_ifconfig.sh: starting net 255 @ 417 sec ./evil_ifconfig.sh 21,84s user 3