Am 10.08.2013 19:47, schrieb Reindl Harald:
> i am currently working at my F18 SPEC-file to reflect the latest
> changes in my packaging and rebuild 3.2.5 ASAP on Fedora
> 19 so that "yum update" and "yum downgrade" gives a better picture
> 
> but i doubt that the 3 years old XEON at the company will
> outperform the one year old IvyBdrige at home with the
> same environment, benchmarks besides ATS are compareable
> 
> we will see

Am 10.08.2013 19:37, schrieb Leif Hedstrom:
> Yeah I've tested it with my normal perf regressions, and 3.3.5 was
> the same as 3.2.4. In my small object test I get 160,000 qps

on what hardware straight from hell do you get 160 thousand qps?
however, back to topic......
____________________________________________________________________________

OK, sorry for the noise, that's why there was a "?" in the subject
same virtual machine with trafficserver-3.2.5-3.fc19.20130810.rh.x86_64

Total transferred:      94732065 bytes
HTML transferred:       64253704 bytes
Requests per second:    3206.60 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       62.371 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       0.312 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          2966.48 [Kbytes/sec] received
____________________________________________________________________________

so there is a regression with Fedora 19 GCC or the older Xeon
outperforms the Core i7 for whatever reason in context ATS

GCC regression is unlikely and F19 with -fstack-protector-strong
should outperform the F18 -fstack-protector-all builds

Fedora 19:
gcc-4.8.1-1.fc19.x86_64
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz

3.3.5: Requests per second:    3178.58 [#/sec] (mean)
3.2.5: Requests per second:    3206.60 [#/sec] (mean)

Fedora 18:
gcc-4.7.2-8.fc18.x86_64
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5640  @2.67GHz

3.2.5: Requests per second:    9002.97 [#/sec] (mean)
____________________________________________________________________________

very interesting, normally the XEON outperforms my workstation
only in cases where the 2x4 cores are really used and in any
other load tests the 3.40GHz is a least fatser than 2.67GHz

yes, Vmware Workstation is slower then ESXi 5.0 but usually
not *3 times* - sorry again for the noise!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to