On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, you wrote:
> >Alright, so I investigated this question a little bit more:
> >Test: 102,400,000 Megabytes to IDE disk, with Pentium 166 or something like
> >that.
> >So the timings with mmap:
> >Write: ~28 sec
> >Reading: ~20 sec
> >
> >With read/write, the speed-up stronlg
>Wow, if I was manipulating nearly 100 terabytes of data I would opt for some
>sort of SCSI RAID setup instead of IDE... :-)
Yeah, good point:-) I didn't even know I had so much harddrive. It reminds me
of this guy who said: "Gee, I managed to format a floppy to 30megabytesOps,
format c:-
>Alright, so I investigated this question a little bit more:
>Test: 102,400,000 Megabytes to IDE disk, with Pentium 166 or something like
>that.
>So the timings with mmap:
>Write: ~28 sec
>Reading: ~20 sec
>
>With read/write, the speed-up stronlgly depends on how many bytes you write to
>the
Ferenc Tamas Gyurcsan wrote:
> Test: 102,400,000 Megabytes to IDE disk, with Pentium 166 or something like
> that.
Wow, if I was manipulating nearly 100 terabytes of data I would opt for some
sort of SCSI RAID setup instead of IDE... :-)
--
Bob BellCompaq Computer Corporatio
Have you looked at the Xv extension?
- Marc
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Ferenc Tamas Gyurcsan wrote:
> Hi,
> >Look at version 3.9.17* of XFree86 for speedups
> The important stuff is how I draw on X actually. I'm using Qt, and now I'm
> gonna implement an MIT-SHM X drawing thing. This seems to be
Hi,
>Look at version 3.9.17* of XFree86 for speedups
The important stuff is how I draw on X actually. I'm using Qt, and now I'm
gonna implement an MIT-SHM X drawing thing. This seems to be the fastest so far
because it doesn't need a socket call for every single Pixmap operation I do.
Even if
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Ferenc Tamas Gyurcsan wrote:
> experiment with this. It was interesting, but now let's speed-up the X:-).
Look at version 3.9.17* of XFree86 for speedups
- Marc
**
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[E
Alright, so I investigated this question a little bit more:
Test: 102,400,000 Megabytes to IDE disk, with Pentium 166 or something like
that.
So the timings with mmap:
Write: ~28 sec
Reading: ~20 sec
With read/write, the speed-up stronlgly depends on how many bytes you write to
the disk at on
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Ferenc Tamas Gyurcsan wrote:
> much faster it is:
> 4,000,000 bytes:
>mmap:Elapsed time: 4.820 seconds
>open,write,etc:Elapsed time: 16.780 seconds
>
> 60 megs:
> Elapsed time: 112.200 seconds
> Elapsed time: 263.770 seconds
> Somewhat faster:-). I did
Hi again,
The results are not really correct. For further investigation, I have to
sleep first:-(.
Ferenc
**
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the
Hi,
>Please excuse a "not necessarily linux" question, but who wants to share
>opinions/experience on the virtues of mmap ing a file as opposed to opening it
>? I'm about to start work on a project where the local custom is to mmap input
>files and I'm not so sure that's a good idea (the files and
11 matches
Mail list logo
