On Jan 2, 9:52 pm, Colin Law <clan...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 2 January 2011 21:18, paul h <p...@hollyer.me.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Colin,
>
> > I have duplicated your tests using rvm on Ubuntu 10.04, with AMD64,
> > and 3GB RAM, results are below:
>
> > On Dec 30 2010, 3:59 pm, Colin Law <clan...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> On 29 December 2010 23:18, Conrad Taylor <conra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > ...
> >> > Colin, do you have a sample application? Next, it really depends
> >> > on your overall system and Rails app configuration. For example,
> >> > if you don't have enough RAM, your system move data from memory
> >> > to the disk and vice-versa. This is a huge performance hit. Can you
> >> > provide more information?
>
> >> I have 1GByte RAM and while running the test it shows less than half
> >> used and the disk is not rattling. The processor shows 100%
> >> utilisation whilst the test is running, with rake being the process
> >> using most of it.
>
> >> I have tried making a new rails 3.0.3 app
> >> rails new testruby
> >> then using rvm to switch between 1.8.7 p302 and 1.9.2 p136
>
> >> On each ruby I ran
> >> time rake db:migrate
> >> a couple of times to let the disk cache settle out then for 1.8.7 I got
> >> real 0m2.111s
> >> user 0m1.804s
> >> sys 0m0.220s
>
> > real 0m2.520s
> > user 0m2.100s
> > sys 0m0.340s
>
> >> and on 1.9.2
> >> real 0m4.098s
> >> user 0m3.512s
> >> sys 0m0.424s
>
> > real 0m0.922s
> > user 0m0.730s
> > sys 0m0.150s
>
> So you are getting 1.9.2 _faster_ than 1.8.7 for db:migrate?
Yep I was...
however:
I now get (1.9.2p136):
real 4.239s
user 3.600s
sys 0.460s
I've just checked back over the shell output, and I missed an error
message earlier on (I hadn't run bundle install), so those test
results (1.9.2) should be ignored - apologies to all for that. (In my
defence I'm just recovering from major 'man-flu', first day up and
about today, and rvm is a new install today :))
>
>
>
> >> I also tried rake test and got, on 1.8.7
>
> > I ran rake test and got no output, rake test:benchmark gave the
> > following:
>
> >> real 0m3.615s
> >> user 0m3.104s
> >> sys 0m0.316s
>
> > Finished in 0.289591 seconds
>
> >> and on 1.9.2
> >> real 0m6.487s
> >> user 0m5.320s
> >> sys 0m0.684s
>
> > Finished in 0.578807 seconds
>
> >> It seems as if 1.9.2 takes about twice as long for some reason.
>
> >> Colin
>
> > Paul
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
No comments:
Post a Comment