search for: 0io

...://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.c%2B%2B.perfometer/37. Out of curiousity, I ran some quick tests on a AMD Athlon(TM) MP 2100+ box running Redhat linux 7.1. With the LLVM C backend and GCC 3.3 -O3, I got: $ time Output/bigfib.cbe th 50000 > /dev/null 0.800u 0.190s 0:00.99 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 245pf+0w $ time Output/bigfib.cbe th 50000 > /dev/null 0.800u 0.190s 0:00.99 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 245pf+0w $ time Output/bigfib.cbe th 50000 > /dev/null 0.770u 0.230s 0:00.99 101.0% 0+0k 0+0io 245pf+0w Native GCC 3.3 -O2: $ time Output/bigfib.native th 50000 > /dev/null 1.010u 0.170s...

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105 markus at openbsd.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From markus at openbsd.org 2002-02-07 06:54 ------- could you please try this without scp? e.g.

...ilds the Debug+Asserts mode. For replicating it on cmake, run > > mkdir build-directory&& cd build-directory > cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug path/to/llvm/source/root > time make -j32 > > Thanks again. Autoconf + GMake: 16: 1681.512u 189.706s 2:48.96 1107.4% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w 32: 1698.817u 209.073s 2:02.88 1552.6% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w CMake: 32: 1700.340u 222.174s 1:38.27 1956.3% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w -- John T.

.../llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/testresults/X86/ > GCC is reported to be quicker on > Benchmarks/Shootout-C++/ackermann test. This test seems PARTICULARLY noisy for some reason. Take a look at this: [zion Shootout-C++]$ time Output/ackermann.native Ack(3,12): 32765 3.130u 0.010s 0:03.14 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 196pf+0w [zion Shootout-C++]$ time Output/ackermann.native Ack(3,12): 32765 3.280u 0.000s 0:03.28 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 196pf+0w [zion Shootout-C++]$ time Output/ackermann.native Ack(3,12): 32765 3.210u 0.000s 0:03.21 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 196pf+0w [zion Shootout-C++]$ time Output/ackermann.native Ac...

...have a new 32 core machine, so I ran some numbers. These results are for compiling all of LLVM and Clang in a Debug build from scratch. The first number is the -j argument to make, and the rest is the result of the bash builtin time command. 2: 1612.950u 161.293s 15:04.92 196.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w 4: 1624.101u 164.121s 8:00.74 371.9% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w 8: 1657.272u 176.211s 4:35.31 665.9% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w 16: 1681.512u 189.706s 2:48.96 1107.4% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w 32: 1698.817u 209.073s 2:02.88 1552.6% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w The processors are Intel(R) Xeon(R...

Hi all i took a look into LLVM benchmarks from nightly tester and ran Shootout tests on my own. Below go just few outlines. 1. results on my AMD AthlonXP and Xeon used by LLVM team are different sometime. In particular, both Shootout and Shootout-C++ show great speed up with LLVM (in comparison to GCC) on ackerman test on my AthlonXP. But here:

Am 01.11.2011 18:04, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 11:09:41AM +0100, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >> On the reasons why make-based builds are slow, Peter Miller has some >> insight to offer: >> http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ . >> I'm not sure how widely recognized that paper is. Maybe it's widely >> known and today's

Hello John. John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu> writes: [snip] > I did not use CMake but the standard autoconf + Makefile build. > > Not sure if this helps, but here it is, for what it's worth. Very interesting, thanks! CMake introduces more parallelism and it would be great to see how much impact it makes. If you can, please run the cmake build with -j32, just to

...time is slower, but as I increase the input value, fib381 gets slower and slower in run-time performance (almost 200X for an input value of 40). Any hints on what could be going wrong? TIA. % time fib34 30 ... starting fibonacci(30) with JIT... Result: 832040 0.008u 0.000s 0:00.01 0.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w % time fib34 40 ... starting fibonacci(40) with JIT... Result: 102334155 0.427u 0.003s 0:00.44 95.4% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w % time fib381 30 ... starting fibonacci(30) with JIT... Result: 832040 0.795u 0.001s 0:00.81 97.5% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w % time fib381 40 ... starting fibonacci(40) wi...

Hi, I would like to use LLVM-GCC to compare its performance with other compilers. Something like testsuite "Computing very large Fibonacci numbers" at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.c%2B%2B.perfometer/37. My environment: ----------------- Windows 2000 Cygwin $ uname -srom CYGWIN_NT-5.0 1.5.11(0.116/4/2) i686 Cygwin ----------------- What do I have to download from

...gest any reasons why this seemingly-innocuous (though stupid-looking) excerpt from gnu fileutils 4.1 would make llvm-gcc go so incredibly slowly? It doesn't seem to be a question of the size of the output. Here's what I do: % time llvm-gcc -c sha24.c 56.840u 0.050s 1:07.05 84.8% 0+0k 0+0io 1050pf+0w % ls -l sha24.o -rw-r--r-- 1 brg brg 5784 2002-12-14 07:43 sha24.o The problem goes away if I use -S: % time llvm-gcc -S sha24.c 0.060u 0.010s 0:00.09 77.7% 0+0k 0+0io 548pf+0w -- gaeke at uiuc.edu -------------- next part -------------- struct sha_ctx { unsigne...

[Moved from -current to -stable] ???????? 21 ???????? 2006 16:23, Matthew Dillon ?? ????????: > ? ? You might be doing just writes to the mmap()'d memory, but the system > ? ? doesn't know that. Actually, it does. The program tells it, that I don't care to read, what's currently there, by specifying the PROT_READ flag only. > ? ? The moment you touch any mmap()'d

...piece of code.?? Something's wrong on your machine or something. I did the same (but using llvm-gcc for the .ll files). Using a debug build of current ToT I got this: [ghostwheel:~/Desktop] echristo% time ~/builds/build-llvm-64bit/Debug/bin/lli foo.bc.bc 0.210u 0.010s 0:00.22 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w That's a 64-bit build, but you'll notice the time difference. That said I'm guessing that there's something missing since it takes no time to execute. Step by step directions on what you did might help. -eric

...trying the other DC. I have set up freesbsd 11 in a vm and installed samba44 just like I would on devuan and I get this: root at freebsd:~ # net cache flush root at freebsd:~ # time getent passwd rowland rowland:*:10000:10000:Rowland Penny:/home/rowland:/bin/bash 0.000u 0.005s 0:00.01 0.0% 0+0k 5+0io 0pf+0w root at freebsd:~ # time getent passwd rowland rowland:*:10000:10000:Rowland Penny:/home/rowland:/bin/bash 0.000u 0.001s 0:00.00 0.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w So if all else fails, you could try upgrading ;-) At least then we could compare like for like. Rowland

is there any way to prevent this timeou ? i tried --configtimeout=600 --filetimeout=600 but this does not changes anything -- Cordialement, Ghislain _______________________________________________ Puppet-users mailing list Puppet-users@madstop.com https://mail.madstop.com/mailman/listinfo/puppet-users

...le does not work in BATCH: I have a file called Rgraph.in: *rsy at puffin*[15:11][~][57]> cat Rgraph.in jpeg("/tmp/my.jpg") hist(runif(10000)) dev.off() *rsy at puffin*[15:11][~][58]> *rsy at puffin*[15:09][~][55]> R BATCH Rgraph.in OUT 4.120u 0.160s 0:05.17 82.7% 0+0k 0+0io 2208pf+0w *rsy at puffin*[15:09][~][56]> cat OUT R : Copyright 2003, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing Version 1.8.1 (2003-11-21), ISBN 3-900051-00-3 R is free software and comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. You are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. Type 'licen...

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >> /etc/resolv.conf: >> root at nickel:~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf >> nameserver 192.168.11.5 >> nameserver 192.168.1.4 >> domain mydomain.local >> > > I take it at least one of the above nameservers is the AD DC, is the > other another AD DC ? If it isn't,

...ong on your machine or something. I did the same (but > using llvm-gcc for the .ll files). Using a debug build of current > ToT I got this: > > [ghostwheel:~/Desktop] echristo% time ~/builds/build-llvm-64bit/ > Debug/bin/lli foo.bc.bc > 0.210u 0.010s 0:00.22 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w > > > That's a 64-bit build, but you'll notice the time difference. That > said I'm guessing that there's something missing since it takes no > time to execute. Step by step directions on what you did might help. > > -eric > _______________________...

...with 4Gb of RAM ... Starting commands seems to take a long time ... top takes forever, and pstat -s shows: neptune# time pstat -s Device 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Type /dev/aacd0s1b 8388480 119916 8268564 1% Interleaved 0.245u 3.670s 0:27.39 14.2% 16+218k 0+0io 0pf+0w And not much swap is being used for the # of processes .. What else should I be looking at? :(

...e: > Also confirmed with the llvm 3.5.1 release and the llvm 3.6 release > branch on x86_64-apple-darwin14... > > % clang-3.5 -O3 -mssse3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-stack-protector > -fno-exceptions -o 8 8.c > % time ./8 9 > 352 solutions > 3.603u 0.002s 0:03.60 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 2pf+0w > % time ./8 10 > 724 solutions > 104.217u 0.059s 1:44.30 99.9% 0+0k 0+0io 2pf+0w > > % clang-3.6 -O3 -mssse3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-stack-protector > -fno-exceptions -o 8 8.c > % time ./8 9 > 352 solutions > 4.050u 0.001s 0:04.05 100.0% 0+0k 0+0io 2pf+0w > %...