4 ms·
Alternative unit I like is "how many per second" (when done on single hardware unit, one after another, of course). The numbers from there are then easy to gras
by acqq 7y ago
Alternative unit I like is "how many per second" (when done on single hardware unit, one after another, of course). The numbers from there are then easy to grasp, since then they relate to what we actually want to achieve (I haven't checked them for truth):
In billions: L1 cache reference can be done 2 billion times per second.
In millions: Branch mispredict, L2 cache reference,
Mutex lock/unlock and Main memory reference can be done 200, 140, 40 and 10 million times per second.
In thousands: Compress 1K bytes with Zippy, Send 2K bytes over 1 Gbps network, SSD random read, Read 1 MB sequentially from memory, Round trip within same datacenter and Read 1 MB sequentially from SSD* can be done 300, 50, 7, 4, 2 and 1 thousand times per second.
And finally, Disk seek, Read 1 MB sequentially from disk and Send packet CA->Netherlands->CA can be done 100, 50 and 7 times per second.
No graphs needed, or trying to figure out is a microsecond much or not.
- bumbledraven 7y agoSo basically knowing the value of everything in Hz.
- mjevans 7y agoThe numbers in the chart better reflect an 'add up the costs' accounting methodology which is useful for deadlines or cost/benefit comparisons. It had also better be worth it to spend very costly human time to save comparatively cheep computer time. Things at E.G. FANG scale rather than the cron-job that does something overnight at a small business.
- gameswithgo 7y agoif you save 1 second in a program used 1000 times each by 1 millions people....
- mjevans 7y agoRight, that's FANG scale.
- brendangregg 7y agoIn particular, those of us using tracers need to understand the frequency of what we instrument, as it relates to overhead. I came up with a frequency table for Chapter 18 of BPF Performance Tools (out soon).