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

Re: preload



Mark wrote:
2008/1/23, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub rusinek gmail com>:
Dnia 23-01-2008, śro o godzinie 18:05 +0100, drago01 pisze:
Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:
Those people running preload can we get some benchmarks to see whether
there is a benefit and if so how much of a benefit there is.

I ask this because I got a post on the from Rahul asking whether there
was any significant benefit running preload. I personally don't have any
numbers so I'm going to try and start to benchmark the information.

Well I tryed it and benchmarked it using bootchart and its even _worse_
then readahead that we decided to disable.

No preload: 57 sec
With preload: 1m 25sec

ie.  ~50% slowdown
Strange... Preload shouldn't slow system down, but make it load
faster...

I'm getting crazy of your reply's..
And it's right that preload is making things slower. it needs to load
them in the memory sometime. that time is in the boot progress. if
your preload "database" is big than you will notice the slowdown in
the boot but you will also notice the speedup in the applications
(like firefox).

I personally rather have a slow boot and for the rest fast responding
applications than just a "slow" and slow applications.

Btw i'm currently busy with benching and that really is irritating...
nearly all the apps that i want to bench can't be benched with "time
appname"!

O well.. expect some results soon


I just blogged a partial solution to your benching problem:

http://screwyouenterpriseedition.blogspot.com/2008/01/timing-application-startup.html

Tell me what you think. (Code format is due to blogger lacking some things I'd rather it had).

--CJD


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