[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Comparing Java Web Server performance



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

But thats exactly my point - how can I compare the performance!?!

Our 3.2 GHz Xeons seem to be outperforming our Dual 248 Opterons,
but I don't know how I can really compare this...

Is idle a good way of comparing this?

take the values from /proc/stat twice, (the first line)

time1: cpu  343278033 23768 19953941 1442746591 4716086 1372872 5551609
time2: cpu  343278589 23768 19953979 1442748407 4716092 1372875 5551621
delta:            556     0       38       1816       6       3      12

total = 2431

idle% = 1816/2431 * 100
      = 74.70%

???

Any other suggestions?

Regards

Andrew



On Dec 1, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Chris Wagner wrote:

I would ignore the hyperthreading and go with the Opterons. Depending on the process's thread patterns the HT can make a difference or be totally useless. I like to use this analogy. Threads execute by putting their "people" in a train of cars and sending it for a loop through the roller coaster. Hyperthreading lets u put somebody else's people in any unused cars. It's too much of a crap shoot for me and who knows what other kind of overhead it's producing. Not to mention how it complicates figuring cpu usage. The only way I can think to compare them is to do benchmarking with
and without the HT turned on.  It's really application specific.

At 01:52 PM 12/1/2005 +0100, Andrew Miehs wrote:
One problem that I am having though is trying to find a good way to
compare 2 proc Opteron machines
vs 2 proc Xeons with Hyperthreading....




--
REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER         ---=< WTC 911 >=--
"...ne cede malis"

00000100


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDjwrJW126qUNSzvURAgmMAJ0Uzq2yAWqWhCl0GmnUrRmL6BtCxACgjK/u
+J2W8U9r3zSFPxPUkJuo2RE=
=X7bS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: