4 ms·
Regarding the 'sudo' issue: Doing a benchmark by just running an example executable is not really recommended because there's a ton of reasons why you might get
by sagacity 2y ago
Regarding the 'sudo' issue: Doing a benchmark by just running an example executable is not really recommended because there's a ton of reasons why you might get differing performance.
It's probably better to set up an actual benchmark using a crate like Criterion instead [0].
[0] https://github.com/bheisler/criterion.rs https://github.com/bheisler/criterion.rs
- arp242 2y agoIt's fine for things like this where you want to get a rough performance indication to see on what order of magnitude things are at (~1MB/s vs. ~10 vs. ~50 vs. ~100). A few percent error margin is fine for that. Tools like that are to eliminate noise and variation, which is an entirely different issue. According to the article, "sudo" is about 70% faster. That has nothing to do with the benchmarking method.
- sagacity 2y agoIt could eliminate issues where startup time and background scanning processes might interfere with initial throughput, though? Even things like CPU throttling could be affecting the test somehow. The main goal is to eliminate as many variables as you can.
- marginalia_nu 2y agoIt's fairly realistic for the first run to be from disk, and the second from cache in a scenario like this, and ~2x difference between the two isn't entirely unrealistic.