Hi, I'm a bit stuck with finding proper solution. What iterest me right now is comparison of Zope, CMF, Plone perfomance on hardware that pretend to be called server-kind. Does anybody has any experience or benchmark result in comparing Intel Xeon and AMD Athlon MP? Anything? Zope, CMF, Plone ab comparison. Pystones benchmark results? Does anybody know how memory type influences perfomance? And does anybody succeded in binding Zope instances to different processors in 2-processor configurations? We got poor perfomance with P IV and thus I am asking if anybody has better stories regarding hardware. Thanks in advance, m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua cell: +380 50.3174578
I'd recommend *not* going with AMD. See the link in my sig. hth, ken -- AMD crashes? See http://cleveland.lug.net/~ken/amd-problem/. Myroslav Opyr at 20:45 (UTC+0200) on Mon, 9 Dec 2002 said: = Hi, = = I'm a bit stuck with finding proper solution. What iterest me right now is = comparison of Zope, CMF, Plone perfomance on hardware that pretend to be = called server-kind. Does anybody has any experience or benchmark result in = comparing Intel Xeon and AMD Athlon MP? Anything? Zope, CMF, Plone ab = comparison. Pystones benchmark results? Does anybody know how memory type = influences perfomance? = = And does anybody succeded in binding Zope instances to different = processors in 2-processor configurations? = = We got poor perfomance with P IV and thus I am asking if anybody has = better stories regarding hardware. = = Thanks in advance, = = m. = -- = Myroslav Opyr = zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting = e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua = cell: +380 50.3174578 = = = = _______________________________________________ = Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org = http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope = ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** = (Related lists - = http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce = http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ) =
ken wrote:
I'd recommend *not* going with AMD. See the link in my sig.
I've read that information. Ok, I understand your frustration but: 1) Server do not have AGP card installed (and cares not about GUI) 2) Server MB is usually built on chipset better then VIA (probably AMD-760 MP) 3) Server can avoid running Linux (FreeBSD can do the job). Is there any flat statistics? Server running AMD processor hanged each week, Server running dual-AMD Athlon MP processor showed -325 pystones compared to 5468 pystones on Intel Celeron. Again I am not for not against AMD or Intel, I'm interested in numbers... m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua <http://zope.net.ua/> ° Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua <mailto:myroslav@zope.net.ua>
Myroslav, You bring up some good points: Myroslav Opyr at 23:59 (UTC+0200) on Mon, 9 Dec 2002 said: = ken wrote: = = >I'd recommend *not* going with AMD. See the link in my sig. = > = > = I've read that information. Ok, I understand your frustration but: Yeah, there was a lot of frustration the first year, but it's just a fact of life now. I guess I should rewrite my doc now that my mood is different. Genuinely I was just offering a warning. AMD doesn't stand behind their products, certainly didn't honor their guarantee with me. = 1) Server do not have AGP card installed (and cares not about GUI) This is absolutely true. Some people like to have the option, when sitting at the server, to be able to bring up X, open several windows, avail oneself of visual diagnostics, etc. I've worked on servers both ways. Having a GUI makes life easier. But that's my personal preference. = 2) Server MB is usually built on chipset better then VIA (probably = AMD-760 MP) True. I specifically asked for a MB without a VIA chipset. = 3) Server can avoid running Linux (FreeBSD can do the job). IIRC, BSD is subject to the same cache coherency problem. I should say "was" actually. Newer kernel code fixes the bug, I've read. = = Is there any flat statistics? Server running AMD processor hanged each = week, Server running dual-AMD Athlon MP processor showed -325 pystones = compared to 5468 pystones on Intel Celeron. Again I am not for not = against AMD or Intel, I'm interested in numbers... = = m. =
Am 09.12.2002, 20:22 Uhr schryb ken <ken@cleveland.lug.net>:
I'd recommend *not* going with AMD. See the link in my sig.
Can't go along with you there. We have a number of AMD Servers and they never had any problems. The only one to ever fail had a P3 CPU. IMHO nobody runs a server with an AGP card and you usually opt for more reliable chipsets than VIA. You can't blame AMD for systems built from substandard/cheap components. Sure, you're frustrated by your workstation and I'd be the same if I had experienced this amount of problems, but servers are something else entirely. Jo. -- Internetmanufaktur Jo Meder ---------------------- Berlin, Germany http://www.meder.de/ ------------------- fon: ++49-30-417 17 63 33 Kollwitzstr. 75 ------------------------ fax: ++49-30-417 17 63 45 10435 Berlin --------------------------- mob: ++49-170- 2 98 89 97 Public GnuPG-Key ---------- http://www.meder.de/keys/jo-pubkey.txt
Jo Meder wrote:
[snip]
We have a number of AMD Servers and they never had any problems. The only one to ever fail had a P3 CPU.
Since you have both Intel and AMD Servers, do you have any comparisons or at least subjective feeling about the speed of those regarding Zope perfomance? m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua <http://zope.net.ua/> ° Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua <mailto:myroslav@zope.net.ua>
Am 10.12.2002, 01:49 Uhr schröb Myroslav Opyr <myroslav@zope.net.ua>:
Since you have both Intel and AMD Servers, do you have any comparisons or at least subjective feeling about the speed of those regarding Zope perfomance?
If I compare systems with matching components I'd say the difference in performance is negligible. No hard facts here, just my impression. Jo. -- Internetmanufaktur Jo Meder ---------------------- Berlin, Germany http://www.meder.de/ ------------------- fon: ++49-30-417 17 63 33 Kollwitzstr. 75 ------------------------ fax: ++49-30-417 17 63 45 10435 Berlin --------------------------- mob: ++49-170- 2 98 89 97 Public GnuPG-Key ---------- http://www.meder.de/keys/jo-pubkey.txt
On Monday 09 December 2002 21:22, ken wrote:
I'd recommend *not* going with AMD. See the link in my sig. Inhell CPU advertisement? ;-) Using good and expencive motherboard (like ASUS) we have no such problems with AMD's and no *any* crashes. But using GOOD hardware with AMD CPU's will rise up server price even higher than Intel's one.
-- Regards, Bogdan Dijkstra probably hates me (Linus Torvalds, in kernel/sched.c)
From: "Bo M. Maryniuck" <b.maryniuk@forbis.lt>
But using GOOD hardware with AMD CPU's will rise up server price even higher than Intel's one.
Nah. I bought my computer this July, and I have an ASUS board, as you recommended, and it was much cheaper "per pystone" than Intel. If I remember correctly I lowered the price a good $200 as compared to using Intel-stuff, even though I got faster memory and all. It probably depends a bit on which processors you compare. I didn't buy the fastest AMD around but the third fastest I think. Going faster would have made the difference bigger (Intel charges ridicolous amounts for their top of the line stuff) and it may well be that the difference would have been smaller if I had bought a slower processor. Best Regards Lennart Regebro Torped Strategi och Kommunikation AB
On Wednesday 11 December 2002 11:42, Lennart Regebro wrote:
Nah. I bought my computer this July, and I have an ASUS board, as you recommended, and it was much cheaper "per pystone" than Intel. If I remember correctly I lowered the price a good $200 as compared to using Intel-stuff, even though I got faster memory and all.
Hmm... Depends where you bought it! ;-) Also not processor / mbd only. There is a HDD where probably you want SCSII, there is cool Graphic Card, etc. By the way, do you recommend AMD? ;-) -- Regards, Bogdan Win32-API is wonderful : Full of things to wonder about...
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Myroslav Opyr wrote:
Hi,
I'm a bit stuck with finding proper solution. What iterest me right now is comparison of Zope, CMF, Plone perfomance on hardware that pretend to be called server-kind. Does anybody has any experience or benchmark result in comparing Intel Xeon and AMD Athlon MP? Anything? Zope, CMF, Plone ab comparison. Pystones benchmark results? Does anybody know how memory type influences perfomance?
I have an AMD athlon XP 1800 with 1G DDR333 ram that I installed 66 days ago on a server and it has not crashed or had any problems. It gets about 19000 pystone/second and pystone translate directly to zope performance in my experience. It is running on a Biostar M7VIF board which it a VIA KT333 chipset and it has worked very well. I have seen other KT333 boards that where not stable but I really like the Biostar boards I have two of these boards and they have been working great. I don't know about MP systems I have not tested that yet. I also don't know how the memory speed affects performance but this system is far faster then the previous system. I can't comment on CMF or Plone becuase I don't use them I have a python product I wrote that we use and it works quite nicely on this system.
kosh@aesaeion.com wrote:
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Myroslav Opyr wrote:
I have an AMD athlon XP 1800 with 1G DDR333 ram that I installed 66 days ago on a server and it has not crashed or had any problems. It gets about 19000 pystone/second and pystone translate directly to zope performance in my experience. [snip]
I can't comment on CMF or Plone becuase I don't use them I have a python product I wrote that we use and it works quite nicely on this system.
Plone is ZPT centered and ZCatalog queries centered. It is a lot of object sitting in a memory cache and a lot of processing power is being consumed. Thus processor cache is not sufficient for the task and speed of conventional memory is becoming important. This is why I am asking about memory subsystem configuration. I am not sure about dual-processor system. Both processors will be competing the memory, the bus unless there are separate channels. If anybody now details about CMF/Plone and how they cope with different memory subsystems it would be great. There is psyco which can speed things a lot but with P IV we have experience that it gives _nothing_ at all. I am sure it is there and it is active but I cannot see any benefit from compiled code. If somebody has benchmarks for python/python+psyco on different hardware it would be great. m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua <http://zope.net.ua/> ° Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua <mailto:myroslav@zope.net.ua>
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 02:35, Myroslav Opyr wrote:
kosh@aesaeion.com wrote:
I am not sure about dual-processor system. Both processors will be competing the memory, the bus unless there are separate channels.
If you run just one Zope then you don't need to worry about competeing for memory ;) as only one processor at a time will be used by the same python process regardless of processor type. -- Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>
On 10 Dec 2002, Hannu Krosing wrote:
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 02:35, Myroslav Opyr wrote:
kosh@aesaeion.com wrote:
I am not sure about dual-processor system. Both processors will be competing the memory, the bus unless there are separate channels.
If you run just one Zope then you don't need to worry about competeing for memory ;) as only one processor at a time will be used by the same python process regardless of processor type.
I am worrying because it'll be a dozen of Zopes running there, but at least two of them will do the load, others will be sleeping but shoulb be at hand all the time... Competition for the bus and for the memory should be heavy. Thus I'm asking about binding different Zopes to different processors to avoid locks people told me are possible due to Python locking... m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua cell: +380 50.3174578
I have an AMD athlon XP 1800 with 1G DDR333 ram that I installed 66 days ago on a server and it has not crashed or had any problems. It gets about 19000 pystone/second and pystone translate directly to zope performance in
On a dual Xeon 2.2 ghz machine [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.51 This machine benchmarks at 19607.8 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.48 This machine benchmarks at 20833.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.5 This machine benchmarks at 20000 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.49 This machine benchmarks at 20408.2 pystones/second longer run: [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 4.82 This machine benchmarks at 20746.9 pystones/second It's a wintec rackmount box and annoys the hell out of me due to it's noise. Brad Clements, bkc@murkworks.com (315)268-1000 http://www.murkworks.com (315)268-9812 Fax AOL-IM: BKClements
Brad Clements wrote:
I have an AMD athlon XP 1800 with 1G DDR333 ram that I installed 66 days ago on a server and it has not crashed or had any problems. It gets about 19000 pystone/second and pystone translate directly to zope performance in
On a dual Xeon 2.2 ghz machine
[snip]
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 4.82 This machine benchmarks at 20746.9 pystones/second
It's a wintec rackmount box and annoys the hell out of me due to it's noise.
What is RAM configuration? In this test we see perfomance of one processor only. Processor GHz Memory Pystones ========== === ======== ======== Xeon 2.2 - 20746 Athlon XP 1.8 DDR333 - 19000 Pentium IV 1.5 SDRAM133 - 11267 Can anybody add more here? m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua cell: +380 50.3174578
What is RAM configuration?
1GB and running two pystones at once: [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py & ; Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py [1] 500 Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.01 This machine benchmarks at 19960.1 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.02 This machine benchmarks at 19920.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Brad Clements, bkc@murkworks.com (315)268-1000 http://www.murkworks.com (315)268-9812 Fax AOL-IM: BKClements
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Brad Clements wrote:
What is RAM configuration?
1GB
Is there a chance to find out it's type and if it is registered memory?
and running two pystones at once:
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py & ; Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py [1] 500 Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.01 This machine benchmarks at 19960.1 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.02 This machine benchmarks at 19920.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$
Effectively doubling perfomance... Summary of collected information is at: http://plone.org/Members/interra/hardware m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua cell: +380 50.3174578
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 09:44:18PM +0200, Myroslav Opyr wrote: [ This was about a Dual-CPU Xeon, IIRC ]
and running two pystones at once:
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py & ; Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py [1] 500 Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.01 This machine benchmarks at 19960.1 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.02 This machine benchmarks at 19920.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$
Effectively doubling perfomance...
This is a *single* CPU Athlon (XP 1800+, 1.5 GHz) $ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second $ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py &\ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py &\ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py & python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py [1] 23242 [2] 23243 [3] 23244 Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.52 This machine benchmarks at 19230.8 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.54 This machine benchmarks at 18518.5 pystones/second They all seem to run sequentially, and the numbers do not change even if I try to run 32 of them in parallel. Marius Gedminas -- The BeOS takes the best features from the major operating systems. It's got the power and flexibility of Unix, the interface and ease of use of the MacOS, and Minesweeper from Windows. -- Tyler Riti
Hi, Guido! I've found you as translator of pystones.py test into Python (from C). Can you give explanation of the below fact of running several parralel pystones.py processes and not affecting results. Is pure processing time calculated? Thank you, m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 09:44:18PM +0200, Myroslav Opyr wrote: [ This was about a Dual-CPU Xeon, IIRC ]
and running two pystones at once:
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py & ; Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py [1] 500 Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.01 This machine benchmarks at 19960.1 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.02 This machine benchmarks at 19920.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$
Effectively doubling perfomance...
This is a *single* CPU Athlon (XP 1800+, 1.5 GHz)
$ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second
$ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py &\ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py &\ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py & python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py [1] 23242 [2] 23243 [3] 23244 Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.52 This machine benchmarks at 19230.8 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.54 This machine benchmarks at 18518.5 pystones/second
They all seem to run sequentially, and the numbers do not change even if I try to run 32 of them in parallel.
Marius Gedminas
Hi, as Guido told:
pystone uses time.clock(), which (on Unix/Linux) measures CPU time, not wall clock time.
Thus speed is pure processing speed and small decrease in pystones is extra expenses for process switching. I'm updating list on http://plone.org/Members/interra/hardware There is a bit of ambiguity in AMD processors clocking... I was trying to put not real frequency but its Intel equivalent, correct me if I am wrong. m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua Myroslav Opyr wrote:
I've found you as translator of pystones.py test into Python (from C). Can you give explanation of the below fact of running several parralel pystones.py processes and not affecting results. Is pure processing time calculated?
Thank you,
m. -- Myroslav Opyr zope.net.ua * Ukrainian Zope Hosting e-mail: myroslav@zope.net.ua
Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 09:44:18PM +0200, Myroslav Opyr wrote: [ This was about a Dual-CPU Xeon, IIRC ]
and running two pystones at once:
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py & ; Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py [1] 500 Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.01 This machine benchmarks at 19960.1 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 5.02 This machine benchmarks at 19920.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$
Effectively doubling perfomance...
This is a *single* CPU Athlon (XP 1800+, 1.5 GHz)
$ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second
$ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py &\ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py &\ python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py & python /usr/lib/python2.2/test/pystone.py [1] 23242 [2] 23243 [3] 23244 Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.52 This machine benchmarks at 19230.8 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.53 This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second This machine benchmarks at 18867.9 pystones/second Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.54 This machine benchmarks at 18518.5 pystones/second
They all seem to run sequentially, and the numbers do not change even if I try to run 32 of them in parallel.
Marius Gedminas
MSI K7 Master-S motherboard (AMD 760) Single Athlon XP 1700+ 512MB ECC DDR266 RAM RedHat 8.0 (finally, a usable .0 release :-)) python 2.1.3 compiled from source rpm (see my post today on zope-dev) using gcc version 3.2 20020903 (Red Hat Linux 8.0 3.2-7) python2.1 /usr/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.55 This machine benchmarks at 18181.8 pystones/second Adam On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 12:28, Brad Clements wrote:
I have an AMD athlon XP 1800 with 1G DDR333 ram that I installed 66 days ago on a server and it has not crashed or had any problems. It gets about 19000 pystone/second and pystone translate directly to zope performance in
On a dual Xeon 2.2 ghz machine
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.51 This machine benchmarks at 19607.8 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.48 This machine benchmarks at 20833.3 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.5 This machine benchmarks at 20000 pystones/second [bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 0.49 This machine benchmarks at 20408.2 pystones/second
longer run:
[bkc@strader ~/Zope]$ Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/bin/python Zope-2.6.0-linux2-x86/lib/python2.1/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 100000 passes = 4.82 This machine benchmarks at 20746.9 pystones/second
It's a wintec rackmount box and annoys the hell out of me due to it's noise.
Brad Clements, bkc@murkworks.com (315)268-1000 http://www.murkworks.com (315)268-9812 Fax AOL-IM: BKClements
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
participants (10)
-
Adam Manock -
Bo M. Maryniuck -
Brad Clements -
Hannu Krosing -
Jo Meder -
ken -
kosh＠aesaeion.com -
Lennart Regebro -
Marius Gedminas -
Myroslav Opyr