On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:34 PM,  <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote:
>
>
>>For a test file with 24884706 bytes in /tmp (=tmpfs/ramdisk):
>>- GNU "cksum" currently takes 181 seconds for 1000 iterations
>>- AST "cksum" (called as external program) currently takes 244 seconds
>>for 1000 iterations (partially caused by dragging more shared libraries
>>around, startup time issue with libast-based applications and some other
>>things)
>>- AST "cksum" called as ksh93 builtin takes 216 seconds for 1000
>>iterations (e.g. ~~24 seconds are saved compared to the external
>>application)
>>
>
> On the same file?
>
> I would suggest that that is not a proper benchmark for cksum.

Why? Roland said Sun uses the same kind of loop to evaluate the
performance of cksum and other tools.

>
> Why can't you run it once?

The risk of statistical poisoning is too high. A statistic made from
one sample is junk, not a statistic.
-- 
Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt

Reply via email to