mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Linux

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-12-12, 15:52   #12
Wacky
 
Wacky's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
The Texas Hill Country

32×112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
Since I have quad, it shows 4 same named processes
It would, perhaps be better if you would actually provide the details of your observations and not just your conclusions. For example, what CPU are you using? Are the hard drives equal in speed and internal caching, how much RAM does the system have, etc.

The base execution times (Windows vs Linux) are similar. I find it suspect that on Windows you find little variance, but significantly more variance on Linux.

This points to some additional process running on Linux. (Hence the previous request for "top" information.)
Wacky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-13, 02:30   #13
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

11100001101012 Posts
Default

What he's saying is that even though you're using the same hardware, it could be that for whatever reason Linux doesn't like a certain kind of processor. Just copy and paste what top gives you, and you can use the "[ code ]Code goes here[/ code]" (without the spaces) to make it look better.

Without the spaces you'll see
Code:
Code goes here
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-13, 04:21   #14
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

10100000111102 Posts
Default

In some linux variants, the default setting is to throttle the CPU down when _only_ low priority processes are running. Could be that.

@pepi37: the core part of the computation of PFGW (which is what PRPNet uses, I think), uses the same assembly routines in both Windows and Linux versions. So you're quite wrong in concluding that the problem is with "non-optimized" linux version.
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-13, 04:41   #15
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

11000100011112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
@pepi37: the core part of the computation of PFGW (which is what PRPNet uses, I think), uses the same assembly routines in both Windows and Linux versions. So you're quite wrong in concluding that the problem is with "non-optimized" linux version.
Erm, core computations would not be concerned with the OS so I don't think your example says anything. To optimise for an OS would involve setting things like priority and affinity (and lots of other things) to give the core code the best chance to get lots of CPU cycles.
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-13, 07:25   #16
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×52×103 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
Erm, core computations would not be concerned with the OS so I don't think your example says anything.
Ermmm... What example?
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-13, 08:16   #17
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

6,287 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Ermmm... What example?
Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
the core part of the computation of PFGW (which is what PRPNet uses, I think), uses the same assembly routines in both Windows and Linux versions.
.
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-13, 08:24   #18
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×52×103 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by retina View Post
.
Ah. Not an example -- I was replying to the topic of discussion. To wit:

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
I am on PRPNet now.
<snip>
windows
ppsLow server WU is finished from 79-80 second less then 1 sec
linux - same WU 79-90 second.
I was also trying to disabuse the OP of the notion that there is some kind of anti-linux bias involved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
Problem is always not well optimized application for Linux, and very well optimized app for Windows.
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-14, 09:10   #19
pepi37
 
pepi37's Avatar
 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)

1,481 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wacky View Post
It would, perhaps be better if you would actually provide the details of your observations and not just your conclusions. For example, what CPU are you using? Are the hard drives equal in speed and internal caching, how much RAM does the system have, etc.

The base execution times (Windows vs Linux) are similar. I find it suspect that on Windows you find little variance, but significantly more variance on Linux.

This points to some additional process running on Linux. (Hence the previous request for "top" information.)
Since there is no GUI on Linux ( I think that will be fastest version) I cannot ( or dont know) how to copy and upload top information on this forum.
Since my kernel is so small, I can assure you that there is no undesirable process. As I say before top shows 99-100 % ( in most cases 100%) using of core per process, so CPU utilization is on maximum.
Last thing: I always used one memory module , and last night I added second one. Computation times are dropped in bot cases ( Windows and Linux) and now is nearly same: difference is less then seconds in Windows or Linux. So it looks like that activating dual channel mode on motherboard solved all problems. And also looks like windows are not so sensitive like like to that option.
pepi37 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-14, 16:15   #20
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
Aug 2002

201678 Posts
Default

Quote:
Since there is no GUI on Linux ( I think that will be fastest version) I cannot ( or dont know) how to copy and upload top information on this forum.
Code:
$ top -n 1 > file.txt
Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-12-14, 19:47   #21
chris2be8
 
chris2be8's Avatar
 
Sep 2009

2×32×112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepi37 View Post
Since there is no GUI on Linux ( I think that will be fastest version) I cannot ( or dont know) how to copy and upload top information on this forum.
Since my kernel is so small, I can assure you that there is no undesirable process. As I say before top shows 99-100 % ( in most cases 100%) using of core per process, so CPU utilization is on maximum.
Last thing: I always used one memory module , and last night I added second one. Computation times are dropped in bot cases ( Windows and Linux) and now is nearly same: difference is less then seconds in Windows or Linux. So it looks like that activating dual channel mode on motherboard solved all problems. And also looks like windows are not so sensitive like like to that option.
We still don't have enough information to tell what's going on.
What CPU do you have?
What sort of motherboard is it on?
How big are the memory modules and how fast are they?
What disk(s) do you have?
How much swap space (on LInux type "free -t")?
What version of Windows are you running?
What Linux distribution is it? Post output from "uname -a" and "ls -l /etc/*release".
What program versions are you running? Where did they come from? How do you switch from Windows to Linux (dual boot)?

If you are using a Linux distro that uses more memory than the Windows version it might have been paging before you added memory. That could explain the different speed.

Chris K
chris2be8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Switch from Windows to Linux Svenie25 Software 2 2013-12-18 11:23
Okay to switch between windows and linux? Unregistered Information & Answers 1 2011-06-09 02:28
Linux is faster than Windows? ShiningArcanine Software 15 2008-03-04 15:27
going from linux to windows nbv4 Software 1 2006-04-04 02:04
Linux that can run Windows programs ThomRuley Linux 9 2004-05-09 03:21

All times are UTC. The time now is 07:14.


Sun Oct 24 07:14:31 UTC 2021 up 93 days, 1:43, 0 users, load averages: 0.58, 0.93, 1.21

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.