From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,325a055bed62c230 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: reason67@my-deja.com Subject: Re: Apex vs GNAT on solaris Date: 1999/12/07 Message-ID: <82hokf$b9l$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 557318669 References: <82hiuj$74o$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <82hnll$ahu$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Http-Proxy: NetCache@www-blv-proxy4.boeing.com: Version NetApp Release 3.4D6: Mon Aug 23 16:40:19 PDT 1999-Solaris, 1.0 x35.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 12.13.226.14 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Dec 07 01:41:35 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDreason67 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.05 [en]C-Boeing Kit (Win95; I) Date: 1999-12-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <82hnll$ahu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar wrote: > In article <82hiuj$74o$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > reason67@my-deja.com wrote: > > You need to say what options you are using for both compilers. > We have sometimes found people making the *amazing* mistake > of compiling GNAT with -O0. Generally the appropriate options > for benchmarking are -O2 -gnatn. Did a gnatmake with no options. so I got gcc -c. In apex I did the default link, which is what we were doing in production. (Apex's results were my primary concern here, benchmarking, if you can call it that, was an afterthought). > The options are critical, because otherwise you may simply > be measuring differences in choices of default options. For > example if one compiler inlines by default, the other one > does not, then the comparison may be meaningless. This is true. I was actually personally concerned with the defaults that both compilers used. I am sure I could have made GNAT run faster, and I am sure I could have made Apex run faster. My curiousity was how they ran "out of the box" against one another. I thought others might find it interesting as well. This was by no stretch of the imagination anything like a formal benchmark. I did not take network considerations into account nor did I take system load into account. I averaged multiple runs to general ideas of how they worked against one another. > You also need to specify all other parameters. For instance, > if you are running tasking, make sure you are comparing > comparable underlying threads implementations, otherwise you > again have apples and oranges (e.g. which of the two threads > libraries did you use for GNAT). Apex is running POSIX Threads. I did not install GNAT on this machine, but my assumption, given the similarity of results is that GNAT is also using POSIX threads. Had the timing been significantly off, I would have checked. Let me re-iterate one more time... These results should not ever be consdered formal bench marks. They were simply a comparison tests I ran, out of curiosity, with the standard Apex Posix Thread model, and the standard GNAT 3.11 installation. Default compilation and linking options were used. --- Jeffrey S. Blatt Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.