Re: Sun performance - Major discovery!

So you want -fast added as default for non-gcc Solaris?  You mentioned
there is a warning generated that we have to deal with?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Neil Conway wrote:
>
> > Hey Jeff,
> >
> > On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 11:46, Jeff wrote:
> > > Yeah - like I expected it was able to generate much better code for
> > > _bt_checkkeys which was the #1 function in gcc on both sun & linux.
> >
> > If you get a minute, would it be possible to compare the performance of
> > your benchmark under linux/gcc and solaris/gcc when PostgreSQL is
> > compiled with "-O3"?
> >
> Sun:
> gcc:
> none: 60 seconds
> -O: 21 seconds
> -O2: 20 seconds
> -O3: 19 seconds
>
> suncc:
> none: 52 seconds
> -fast: 20 secondsish.
>
> -fast is actually a macro that expands to the "best settings" for the
> platform that is doing the compilation.
>
>
> Linux:
> -O2: 35
> -O3: 40
> Odd.. I wonder why it took longer. Perhaps gcc built some bad code?
> I thought the results were odd there so I ran the test many times.. same
> results! Swapped the binaries back (so -O2 was running) and boom. back to
> 35.
>
> Sun gcc -O2 and suncc -fast both pass make check.
>
>
> --
> Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
> http://www.jefftrout.com/
> http://www.stuarthamm.net/
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073