Niek, your tool is fine.  The problem is in the way tests are being run,
and then folks looking for an explanation as to why the numbers are
anomolous.

Niek Wrote: 
> 
> And as I said in an earlier post, the measurements taken here show the
> _real_ time it takes for the CLI to perform some database query.

Sorry, your test tool does not quite do what you say... it does not
measure _the_ time it takes, rather, it measures only _a_ single run
which by itself *plus* all the perturbing affects of an uncontrolled
system, is terribly inaccurate.  The numbers reported early demonstrate
and support this.  A single run of the tool is competing with the rest
of the processes running on the system - there are dozens or hundreds
of threads also running and competing.

Your test tool does not isolate the various affects that perturb
measurements, so its the benchmarker's job to defeat such affects. 
With the earlier results reported being 2-3x out of agreement, it is
clear that what is being benchmarked, is not in fact what you believe
is being measured.  Therefore, drawing any conclusions is not very
meaningful, or useful.

Numerous background processes, virus scanners, network activity, disk
spinup time, low-power to max-power CPU speedup time, swapping, disk
cache, hardware interrupts, are factors which need to be eliminated and
reduced before conclusions can be drawn.


-- 
MrC
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to