Was Collecting SBUs now, Fast compile engines
d95-bli.no at spam.nada.kth.se
Fri Jun 7 14:53:50 PDT 2002
Ian Molton wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Jun 2002 23:35:12 +0200
> Björn Lindberg <d95-bli.no at spam.nada.kth.se> wrote:
> > > thing is, the data has to get INTO those caches, so unless you have
> > > compiled the software already, all that data is sitting on the
> > > harddisc, not in memory.
> > Of course, but assuming enough RAM it only has to be read /once/ while
> > it will be processed probably several times.
> yes, but the point is that what KIND of RAM you have is irrelevant and
> makes little impact on performance. Even 70ns FPM DRAM SIMMS are at
> LEAST an order of magnitude faster than the BEST harddiscs.
> Consider you have a system and you:
> 1/2 the CPU speed - BIG effect on compiling
> run the HDD at PIO4 instead of UDMA100 - BIG effect on compiling
> use PC133 instead of DDR - tiny effect on compiling.
I agree with the first and third one. I don't think HDD performance
would have that big an impact, but of course I could be wrong.
> > You forgot 0) CPU speed, which is the most important factor, IMO. Of
> > course, we could argue about the significance of CPU speed versus CPU
> > cache speed/size, but it is not very fruitful, since faster (more
> > modern) processors generally come with faster/larger caches.
> I didnty forget, its just impossible to measure with any degree of
> sanity, even in the same family of CPUs, let alone across (say) ARM, PPC
> and X86.
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-chat' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-chat