Re: productivity/khard (or python) seem slow

On 2019.05.17 11:41, Paco Esteban wrote:
>On Thu, 16 May 2019, Joel Carnat wrote:
>
>> On Thu 16/05 08:55, Paco Esteban wrote:
>> > Can't say about your VM. On my desktop:
>> >
>> > $ time (khard list | wc -l)
>> > 104
>> > ( khard list | wc -l; ) 0.51s user 0.25s system 97% cpu 0.779 total
>> >
>>
>> Is this on OpenBSD ? The time output looks different.
>
>Of course it is ... (-current though)
>That should be zsh that uses an internal builtin instead of
>/usr/bin/time I guess (did not check).
>
>Here it is on ksh with base time:
>
> $ time (khard list | wc -l)
> 104
> 0m00.81s real 0m00.59s user 0m00.21s system
>
>Interestingly a bit slower.

What CPU and storage are you running?

My ThinkPad P50:
* Intel Xeon E3-1505M @ 2.80GHz
* 2 x Samsung 960 PRO PCIe NVMe (OpenZFS mirror)
* O/S: Debian Buster

Results:
$ time (khard list | wc -l)
265
( khard list | wc -l; ) 0.91s user 0.04s system 100% cpu 0.950 total


My ThinkPad X1 Carbon (4th gen)
* Intel Core i7-6600U @ 2.60GHz (Hyper-threading disabled)
* 1 x Samsung MZ-NLN512 SATA
* O/S: OpenBSD 6.5 -current

Results:
$ time (khard list | wc -l)
265
( khard list | wc -l; ) 2.44s user 2.03s system 100% cpu 4.459 total

The OpenZFS mirror is noticeably slower than a single 960 PRO formatted
as ext4. Since the X1 has a SATA drive in it, I'll eventually have to
install OpenBSD on my spare Samsung 960 PRO in order to improve overall
performance.

I also tested OpenBSD 6.[45] in VMware Workstation Pro on my P50, and
it ran extremely slow. So slow that it was unusable. I figure it's
not optimized for virtualization? FreeBSD, Linux, and Windows all run
fine in my VMware.

Best regards,

David Mimms
https://mim.ms