Subject: MV2 speeds on various NetBSD VAX releases
To: None <port-vax@netbsd.org>
From: NetBSD Bob <nbsdbob@weedcon1.cropsci.ncsu.edu>
List: port-vax
Date: 10/30/2000 11:13:16
> 
> NetBSD 1.0A (GENERIC) #165: Mon Dec 11 23:54:20  1995
> 
> ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in 109.57 real seconds = 149.53 KB/sec +++
> ttcp-r: 16777216 bytes in 143.16 real seconds = 114.44 KB/sec +++

Where can I get a load of the 1.0A or 1.1B for the VAX?
I have not seen that anywhere.  I would like to try those for
comparisons, too, and keep a set around for historical reasons.

.....

> NetBSD 1.3.2 (GENERIC) #0: Sat May 30 12:55:49 CEST 1998
> 
> ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in  56.15 real seconds = 291.81 KB/sec +++
> ttcp-r: 16777216 bytes in  84.57 real seconds = 193.72 KB/sec +++
......
> NetBSD 1.5_BETA (GENERIC) #0: Sun Oct 22 19:31:24 PDT 2000
> 
> ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in  87.45 real seconds = 187.36 KB/sec +++
> ttcp-r: 16777216 bytes in 102.36 real seconds = 160.07 KB/sec +++

This is just about what I was getting, it would seem.  That is
about a 35 percent slowdown difference roughly between 1.3.2 and 1.5?

> 
>               -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input--
> --Random--
>               -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block---
> --Seeks---
> Machine    MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec
> %CPU
> 1.0A       20    55  3.9   252 16.4   134  7.4    61  2.1   278 17.3  16.8
> 14.6
> 1.1B       20    64 15.7   757 63.6   307 65.3    71  2.3   571 57.3  24.2
> 18.0
> 1.3.2      20    63 98.2   745 98.2   331 78.3    71 99.5   580 58.5  26.3
> 33.1
> 1.4.2      20    66 99.1   867 94.1   359 67.0    73 99.2   630 42.1  27.9
> 29.4
> 1.5_BETA   20    65 99.8   715 98.4   308 69.4    66 99.4   566 52.5  25.5
> 32.1

The CPU data all looks pretty good and even, especially after 1.3.2.
That still points to the ethernet area as Ragge mentioned?

What is the exact card ordering in your machine?  I noticed some
difference in swapping ethernet/tape/disk around, but I need to
fiddle with that some more.

Thanks

Bob