SmartOS: VTIM_real vs VTIM_mono / double vs uint64_t

[Nils Goroll]

On 07/04/16 08:50, Nils Goroll wrote:
> I expect this may look completely different on other platforms.

SmartOS: significantly less efficient than linux, higher real/mono overhead,
double/uint64 not as relevant because of the lower efficiency

[uplex at varnishdev-il ~/src/varnish-cache/lib/libvarnish]$ uname -a
SunOS varnishdev-il.ham1.v0.uplex.de 5.11 joyent_20151029T053122Z i86pc i386 i86pc
[uplex at varnishdev-il ~/src/varnish-cache/lib/libvarnish]$ cc -o foo
-DTEST_DRIVER -I../.. -I../../include vtim.c vas.c -lm
[uplex at varnishdev-il ~/src/varnish-cache/lib/libvarnish]$ ./foo bench
bench noop test value 0.000000
bench noop took 2.616ns per call

bench warmup test value 0.000000
bench warmup took 276.545ns per call

bench VTIM_mono test value 0.000000
bench VTIM_mono took 274.854ns per call
bench VTIM_mono_i test value 0.000000
bench VTIM_mono_i took 269.778ns per call
bench VTIM_real test value 0.000000
bench VTIM_real took 284.716ns per call
bench VTIM_real_i test value 0.000000
bench VTIM_real_i took 285.487ns per call

bench VTIM_mono test value 3678449.798561
bench VTIM_mono took 278.187ns per call
bench VTIM_mono_i test value 3678452517365498.000000
bench VTIM_mono_i took 271.873ns per call
bench VTIM_real test value 1460016144.865661
bench VTIM_real took 293.806ns per call
bench VTIM_real_i test value 1460016147788149504.000000
bench VTIM_real_i took 292.245ns per call