harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [performance] a few early benchmarks
Date Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:01:25 GMT
2006/11/23, Vladimir Strigun <vstrigun@gmail.com>:
> On 23 Nov 2006 14:37:09 +0600, Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On the 0x22A day of Apache Harmony Vladimir Strigun wrote:
> > > The numbers that I published was received on P4 under Windows +
> > > server.emconf +Harmony-1980. Unfortunately I haven't run Dacapo under
> > > x86_64, but I hope we could receive almost the same range (10-20 %
> > > slower that Sun) with the mentioned configuration.
> >
> > And Sun was running with "-server" too I guess? :)
>
> Yes, of course.
>
> > Maybe, it is time to track performance comparisons of *different
> > platforms* in one place? That should help to avoid major differences in
> > our visions for harmony performance.
>
> Yes, good idea. Should we define the configuration for all VM's as well?
> For instance, for Sun we could use parameters from spec site. What do
> you think about it?
+1 for options from spec site.

>
> > * Melody
> > * marmonytest.org
> > * Robin's site
> > * wiki (just for the start, maybe)
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Vladimir.
> > >
> > > On 11/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > I reviewed - looks like Robin is seeing DRLVM get an aggregate
> > > > performance of about 35% of whatever he's measuring against.
> > > >
> > > > geir
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > > > >> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > > > >>>> Sergey Kuksenko wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> Lets do the simplest thing fist. :)
> > > > >>>>> We can do it. We only need to specify a set of workloads.
> > > > >>>> I've tried running dacapo with 10 warming stages and
we are constantly
> > > > >>>> around 25% speed against the leading JVM (which is always
sun5 or
> > > > >>>> sun6),
> > > > >>>> bea5 is around 80% and ibm5 is around 70%, I'll have
more detailed
> > > > >>>> results shortly.
> > > > >>> I don't understand this at all.  It wasn't but a few weeks
ago when
> > > > >>> someone was reporting decapo numbers that ranged from 90%
of Sun5 to
> > > > >>> 110% of Sun5.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> on x86_64?
> > > > >
> > > > > That's true.  It was x86.
> > > > >
> > > > > But the numbers that Robin is reporting aren't great either, are
they?
> > > > >
> > > > > geir
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Egor Pasko
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message