basically, turning on -frepo enables automatic template instantiation. The first compile will still be slow, but the compiler will generate.rpo files for your objects files. These files more or less keep track of what has been instantiated, and should speed up compilation, since not all of the instantiations have to be rebuilt.
Seriously, try using gcc-3.0.3 with compiler optimizations for the specific cpu core.
I've been working on a computationally expensive project where I see gcc-3.0.3 (with CFLAGS = -O2 -mcpu=ultrasparc) beat out Sun Workshop 5.0 (CFLAGS = -fast).
This is on (recent) sparc hardware on solaris of course. There is hope for gcc - you just have to tweak the flags a little more...
That's just it - They _were_ using mysql, but I think they moved to postgres since it could "scale better"...
SF Enterprise Edition and NDA's
on
SourceForge Drifting
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Also, in talks with one of the sales droids at VA - They were asking for a signed NDA before they could discuss features/changes in the Enterprise Edition...
This may be different now that SF Enterprise Edition is out, but it strikes me as a bit fishy for a supposed open source company...
There is also no upgrade path from the 'free' versions that were available before to the new SF enterprise edition...
People I work with have been in contact with VA regarding deployment of SF Enterprise Edition...
The cost comes out to ~ $300K/year for 900 users... Not very economical, expecially considering I have an 80% functional install running off of the last (GPL'd) release - v2.61
My questions aren't meant to be "veiled troll replies"
I'm just talking from personal experience. I have a system that needs to serve gigabytes of data (very large files). Right now its performance needs to be improved. I'm interested in moving this product to 2.4, after it stablizes. Right now I'm stuck with using kernel 2.2.x Why? This hardware must be stable _and_ usable to my users. Having to wait seconds on a 'ls' on a NFS mounted reiserfs partition on a 500 GB raid is not my idea of a good time.
I'm all for having a high performance journalling filesystem, and I don't care which one it is. I'd be more than happy to continue using reiserfs, since I believe it to be the most stable fs for this task right now. What I don't like is, again, the poor 2.2.x NFS performance.
-Jeremy
Re:Offers nothing over ReiserFS
on
XFS Beta
·
· Score: 1
I do read the news. Alot. on company time;)
I am aware that NFS v3 will be in kernel 2.2.18
What about reiserfs and NFS interactions though? I have read that there is some "fighting" going on there...
Anyone else have performance issues in that combination?
Re:Offers nothing over ReiserFS
on
XFS Beta
·
· Score: 1
Not to be picky or anything...
What about NFS exports and ReiserFS on very large disk arrays? We have a raidzone (~500GB Raid 5 Linux box using ReiserFS) in house, and the NFS performance is pitiful (not just because we are limited to NFSv2 exports due to kernel 2.2.16)
Has anyone gotten Jini and Javaspaces to run? I'm taking a class that has an assignment to write a "distributed" program using javaspaces, and I've been trying to get the examples to run using a release candidate... needless to say, it bombs out, and I don't want to attempt this project in Win98... Thanks!
I was fiddling around with my telnet client and my reely cool hax0r skillz... big_prompt_of_fun>telnet crack.linuxppc.org 80 Trying 169.207.154.108... Connected to crack.linuxppc.org. Escape character is '^]'. HEAD / XML/1.0 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 03:50:55 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) (Red Hat/Linux) Connection: close Content-Type: text/html Using the good 'ol GET method, I got the html for the index page... same seal works if I ask for HEAD / SGML/1.0 prolly doesn't do anything... am I still 3l337 enough?:) -Mister G
Slashdot Mirror
Then there's the problem that they'd actually thrive there, and we'd make the mistake of creating a horrible new martian culture...
Sorry for the late reply....
.rpo files for your objects files. These files more or less keep track of what has been instantiated, and should speed up compilation, since not all of the instantiations have to be rebuilt.
basically, turning on -frepo enables automatic template instantiation. The first compile will still be slow, but the compiler will generate
That's the theory, at least...
Hope this helps
sometimes turning on -frepo while compiling with gcc-3 helps...
That result sounds right...
:)
I know 2.95.3 doesn't have the optimizations for the ultrasparc (-mcpu=ultrasparc) That alone I think was how I was able to beat WS 5.0...
I also agree with you that WS5.0 has... issues
Seriously, try using gcc-3.0.3 with compiler optimizations for the specific cpu core.
I've been working on a computationally expensive project where I see gcc-3.0.3 (with CFLAGS = -O2 -mcpu=ultrasparc) beat out Sun Workshop 5.0 (CFLAGS = -fast).
This is on (recent) sparc hardware on solaris of course. There is hope for gcc - you just have to tweak the flags a little more...
-Jeremy
Grante
if we told you, we';d have to kill you ...
That's just it - They _were_ using mysql, but I think they moved to postgres since it could "scale better"...
Also, in talks with one of the sales droids at VA - They were asking for a signed NDA before they could discuss features/changes in the Enterprise Edition...
This may be different now that SF Enterprise Edition is out, but it strikes me as a bit fishy for a supposed open source company...
There is also no upgrade path from the 'free' versions that were available before to the new SF enterprise edition...
comments?
People I work with have been in contact with VA regarding deployment of SF Enterprise Edition...
The cost comes out to ~ $300K/year for 900 users... Not very economical, expecially considering I have an 80% functional install running off of the last (GPL'd) release - v2.61
my $.02
at least one, chief!
Now why on God's green earth would you say something like "Irix kicks ass...". Granted it ain't Winders, but still...
What about "The Little Schemer"? ;)
My questions aren't meant to be "veiled troll replies"
I'm just talking from personal experience. I have a system that needs to serve gigabytes of data (very large files). Right now its performance needs to be improved. I'm interested in moving this product to 2.4, after it stablizes. Right now I'm stuck with using kernel 2.2.x Why? This hardware must be stable _and_ usable to my users. Having to wait seconds on a 'ls' on a NFS mounted reiserfs partition on a 500 GB raid is not my idea of a good time.
I'm all for having a high performance journalling filesystem, and I don't care which one it is. I'd be more than happy to continue using reiserfs, since I believe it to be the most stable fs for this task right now. What I don't like is, again, the poor 2.2.x NFS performance.
-Jeremy
I do read the news. Alot. on company time ;)
I am aware that NFS v3 will be in kernel 2.2.18
What about reiserfs and NFS interactions though? I have read that there is some "fighting" going on there...
Anyone else have performance issues in that combination?
Not to be picky or anything...
What about NFS exports and ReiserFS on very large disk arrays? We have a raidzone (~500GB Raid 5 Linux box using ReiserFS) in house, and the NFS performance is pitiful (not just because we are limited to NFSv2 exports due to kernel 2.2.16)
-Jeremy
Has anyone gotten Jini and Javaspaces to run? I'm taking a class that has an assignment to write a "distributed" program using javaspaces, and I've been trying to get the examples to run using a release candidate... needless to say, it bombs out, and I don't want to attempt this project in Win98... Thanks!
I was fiddling around with my telnet client and my reely cool hax0r skillz... big_prompt_of_fun>telnet crack.linuxppc.org 80 Trying 169.207.154.108... Connected to crack.linuxppc.org. Escape character is '^]'. HEAD / XML/1.0 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 03:50:55 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) (Red Hat/Linux) Connection: close Content-Type: text/html Using the good 'ol GET method, I got the html for the index page... same seal works if I ask for HEAD / SGML/1.0 prolly doesn't do anything... am I still 3l337 enough? :) -Mister G