Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!herald.usask.ca!alberta!cpsc.ucalgary.ca!deraadt From: deraadt@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Theo de Raadt) Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix Subject: Re: vfork() (was Re: RS6000 questions/comments) Message-ID: Date: 30 Jun 91 07:03:05 GMT References: <1991Jun27.221208.14845@kithrup.COM> <8903@awdprime.UUCP> <351@devnull.mpd.tandem.com> <889@rufus.UUCP> <19439@rpp386.cactus.org> Distribution: usa Organization: U of Calgary, CompSci Lines: 34 In-Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org's message of 30 Jun 91 01:45:51 GMT In article <19439@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes: > I don't know what you call "particularly efficient", but I have measured > fork/exit performance and AIX v3 is worse than SVR1 on a 12MHz 68000 that > I tested in 1986. As I recall a S/6000 Model 530 produced about 8 or 10 > fork/exits per second, compared to about 45 per second on an Mpulse/XL > that I was testing for my employer in 1986 (Pinnacle Systems, Inc., > Garland TX) > The test is real simple - > main () > { > int i; > > for (i = 0;i < 10000;i++) > if (fork () == 0) > exit (); > else > while (wait (0) != -1) > ; > } I'll bite and shove a vfork() in there instead of fork(). Here are times for a Sun4/490, sunos4.1.1. fork() 101.1 real 5.6 user 90.2 sys 99 fork/sec vfork() 9.7 real 0.5 user 6.5 sys 1030 vfork/sec I suggest those who say that vfork() is not needed anymore try this test on their machine.