On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 4:51 AM, Pádraig Brady <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/24/2014 05:21 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: >> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Pádraig Brady <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 05/24/2014 06:32 AM, Jim Meyering wrote: >>>> It looks like it makes sense to double IO_BUFSIZE once again. >>>> What do you think? >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Significant enough to bump up I think, >>> and we never saw regressions with this size. >>> >>> Please amend the date etc. at the top of the comment too. >>> Here are the results from non x86 worth adding I think: >> >> Good point. Done. >> >>> POWER7 3.55GHz, revision 2.1 IBM,8231-E2B >>> 1024=1.3 GB/s >>> 2048=2.5 GB/s >>> 4096=4.8 GB/s >>> 8192=9.2 GB/s >>> 16384=16.8 GB/s >>> 32768=28.0 GB/s >>> 65536=41.4 GB/s >>> 131072=54.8 GB/s >>> 262144=40.0 GB/s >>> 524288=34.5 GB/s >>> 1048576=36.5 GB/s >> >> Nice numbers. It'd be interesting to see power consumption :-) >> Can you determine RAM type and speed for that system? > > dmidecode is not available on this linux ppc system, > though looking at specs for IBM Power 730 it says it takes > 1066 MHz DDR3 > > The numbers above are over the throughput of that though, > so we're in cache land here anyway which each core on this system has: > L3(4MB), L2(256KB), L1d(32KB), L1i(32KB)
Good point. Adjusted and pushed.
