"Mike Ruskai" <thannyd AT earthlink DOT net> kirjoitti viestissä 
news:4B5DCF2F.9050705 AT earthlink DOT net...
> On 1/25/2010 11:07 AM, Timo Neuvonen wrote:
>> some more cpu load, but no peak in workstation's cpu load meter exceeded
>> 50%.
>>
>>
> In Windows, 100% load means all CPU's together at max load.  If you have
> two cores, 50% means 100% load on one core.
>

Actually, there were two graphs, one per core. Neither of them peaked close 
to 50% at GZIP1 level. After increasing comprerssion level (up to GZIP9), it 
needed more cpu load, but it wasn't absolutely the limiting factor if the 
graphs are somehow close to truth.

But the basic question still is, what limits the data rate without 
compression, when cpu load is very low? Using compression still drops the 
compressed rate by same factor the data size shrinks, while the required 
real time doesn't practically chage at all. Sounds very much like it was a 
limit of disk io rate, but it sounds unbelievable to me since figures are 
that low.

But maybe I'll need to test disk read performance first by some other means. 
It will just take a couple of days until I'll have time for that project 
again.


> So you're seeing the best that CPU can do (and P4's are a seriously
> awful design), short of a major change in the compression library to
> utilize multiple threads.
>



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users