caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Erik Rigtorp <erik@rigtorp.com>
To: Gerd Stolpmann <gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de>
Cc: yminsky <yminsky@gmail.com>, caml-list <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:25:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a57051ba0912230325j31f5c690k23eda6aa926726d3@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1261488446.31160.5.camel@flake.lan.gerd-stolpmann.de>

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 14:27, Gerd Stolpmann <gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de> wrote:
>
> Am Dienstag, den 22.12.2009, 13:04 +0100 schrieb Erik Rigtorp:
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 23:50, Erik Rigtorp <erik@rigtorp.com> wrote:
>> > Some IPC Benchmarks, Solaris 10 on a quad core Intel Core2 Duo. The
>> > benchmarks are running on a cpuset with 1 core. I measure the time
>> > from sending in one process until the other process receives the
>> > message. So a context switch and the message passing is included in
>> > the measurements.
>> >
>> > Max/Min/Avg
>> > * Pipes: 28205/5973/6259
>> > * Unix domain sockets: 44256/7748/8153
>> > * SYSv message queues: 19197/5895/6173
>> > * Posix message queues: 37399/10965/11303
>> > * TCP on loopback: 29017/7471/7885
>> >
>> > So the latency is roughly 10µs for all these solutions. That latency
>> > is pretty high and would be several times the processing time of the
>> > message itself.
>>
>> Some more benchmarks:
>>
>> Max/Min/Avg
>> * Spinlocking shm: 50897/403/761  (This one utilizes multiple cores,
>> since one core is just burning while waiting for data)
>> * Pthreads mutex shm: 27582/5246/6577
>>
>> Forgot to say that all measurements are in nanoseconds.
>
> That's for communication between processes, right? How would the picture
> be different (especially comparing the latter two) if you do message
> passing between threads? If I remember correctly, threads are more
> light-weight in Solaris than processes. That could also affect context
> switching times, and scheduler decisions.

With a system supporting green threads/tasklets/erlang processes over
multiple cores you can have 1µs message passing latencies without busy
waiting. I'll checkout the thread message passing too, but probably
not until after new years.

> Do you have source code? I could also run in on Linux, for comparison.

I'll have that approved by my company first. It would actually be
interesting to create a open source multiplatform IPC message passing
benchmark.

Erik


  reply	other threads:[~2009-12-23 11:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-19 19:38 Jeff Shaw
2009-12-20  4:43 ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-20 12:21   ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-20 13:22     ` Martin Jambon
2009-12-20 13:47     ` Yaron Minsky
2009-12-20 16:01       ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21 22:50       ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] Re: [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-22 12:04         ` Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-22 12:27           ` Mihamina Rakotomandimby
2009-12-22 13:27           ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-23 11:25             ` Erik Rigtorp [this message]
2009-12-29 12:07         ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] Re: [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Richard Jones
2009-12-20 14:27     ` Dario Teixeira
2009-12-20 21:14       ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21  1:08         ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21  4:30           ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21  3:58             ` Yaron Minsky
2009-12-21  5:32             ` Markus Mottl
2009-12-21 13:29               ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-26 17:08           ` orbitz
2009-12-20 19:38     ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 12:26       ` Mihamina Rakotomandimby
2009-12-21 14:19         ` general question, was " Keyan
2009-12-21 14:40           ` [Caml-list] " rixed
2009-12-21 14:42           ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21 15:25             ` Eray Ozkural
2009-12-21 14:50           ` Philip
2009-12-21 15:01             ` Keyan
2009-12-21 15:13               ` Stefano Zacchiroli
2009-12-21 15:27               ` Dario Teixeira
2009-12-21 15:46                 ` Jacques Carette
2009-12-21 18:50             ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 18:48           ` Jon Harrop
2010-01-03 10:49           ` Sylvain Le Gall
2010-01-03 20:06             ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 13:07     ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] Re: [Caml-list] " Damien Doligez
2009-12-21 13:31   ` multicore wish [Was: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken] Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-21 14:19     ` multicore wish Mihamina Rakotomandimby
2009-12-21 16:15       ` [Caml-list] " Fischbacher T.
2009-12-21 17:42       ` Dario Teixeira
2009-12-21 18:43       ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 19:53     ` multicore wish [Was: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken] Jon Harrop
2009-12-22 13:09       ` multicore wish Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-22 19:12         ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-22 18:02           ` Edgar Friendly
2009-12-22 19:20             ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-24 12:58               ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-24 16:51                 ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-24 13:19           ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-24 17:06             ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-27 12:45               ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-27 16:37                 ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-28 12:28                 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-28 15:07                   ` Anil Madhavapeddy
2009-12-28 18:05                   ` Xavier Leroy
2009-12-29 16:44                     ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-20 11:56 ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken Erik Rigtorp
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-12-19  9:30 Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-20 16:18 ` [Caml-list] " Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21 19:55   ` Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-21 21:21     ` Sylvain Le Gall
2009-12-29 12:00       ` [Caml-list] " Richard Jones

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a57051ba0912230325j31f5c690k23eda6aa926726d3@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=erik@rigtorp.com \
    --cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
    --cc=gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de \
    --cc=yminsky@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).