XO-1 vs Sugar 0.104 performance, and swap to NAND Flash
Lionel Laské
lionel at olpc-france.org
Thu Apr 9 04:46:24 EDT 2015
Very nice job James.
Thanks to give us these details.
Numbers give sometimes more than tons of words !
Lionel.
2015-04-08 18:00 GMT+02:00 <devel-request at lists.laptop.org>:
>
> Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:47:27 +1000
> From: James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org>
> To: support-gang at lists.laptop.org, devel at lists.laptop.org,
> sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> Subject: Re: XO-1 vs Sugar 0.104 performance, and swap to NAND Flash
> Message-ID: <20150408034727.GI9935 at us.netrek.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Browse is one of the most heavily used activities when internet or
> local content is available.
>
> Tests were run over many hours on several XO-1 laptops. The XO-1 is
> an old design which is slow enough to give useful statistics.
>
> The results show a continued improvement to startup time over the
> recent versions of Sugar, and a very small advantage to using swap
> memory.
>
> --
>
> The first test was to reboot, wait for Sugar to start, then
> automatically start the Browse activity, and time how long it took to
> start. Then the results of hundreds of tests were averaged.
>
> Browse-140 on 12.1.0 with Sugar 0.94 took 25 seconds.
>
> Browse-149.4 on 13.2.1 with Sugar 0.98 took 23 seconds.
>
> Browse-157 on 13.2.4 with Sugar 0.104 and no swap took 21 seconds.
>
> Browse-157 on 13.2.4 with Sugar 0.104 and NAND swap took 20 seconds.
>
> This shows continued improvement to Browse startup time, in the
> scenario where the libraries have to be loaded into memory.
>
> (Reference: test #8, and #9)
>
> --
>
> Another test started and stopped the Browse activity 25 times without
> rebooting. Then the results were averaged.
>
> Browse-140 on 12.1.0 with Sugar 0.94 took 14 seconds.
>
> Browse-149.4 on 13.2.1 with Sugar 0.98 took 15 seconds.
>
> Browse-157 on 13.2.4 with Sugar 0.104 and NAND swap took 13 seconds.
>
> This shows some improvement to Browse startup time, in the scenario
> where the needed libraries are already loaded into memory.
>
> (Reference: test #6)
>
> --
>
> The same test also started and stopped most of the other activities
> 25 times without rebooting. Then the results were averaged.
>
> For Sugar 0.96 the average startup time was 15 seconds the first time,
> and 11 seconds each subsequent time.
>
> For Sugar 0.98 the average startup time was 17 seconds the first time,
> and 13 seconds each subsequent time.
>
> For Sugar 0.104 the average startup time was 14 seconds the first
> time, and 11 seconds each subsequent time.
>
> Detailed results by activity below. The key for these tables is:
>
> cold = startup time for first start after sugar restart.
> warm = average of startup time for subsequence starts.
> std = population standard deviation for warm starts.
> ratio = a ratio comparing warm start to cold start times.
> tests = number of warm start tests recorded.
>
> For Sugar 0.96 the results by activity were:
>
> bundle_id cold warm std ratio tests
>
> com.garycmartin.Moon 10.595 10.643 0.531 1.005 24
> com.jotaro.ImplodeActivity 6.691 6.486 0.045 0.969 24
> org.laptop.AbiWordActivity 19.474 14.459 0.804 0.743 24
> org.laptop.AcousticMeasure 11.984 7.761 0.045 0.648 24
> org.laptop.Calculate 9.809 9.560 0.065 0.975 24
> org.laptop.HelpActivity 19.487 11.342 0.688 0.582 24
> org.laptop.MeasureActivity 12.478 10.246 0.085 0.821 24
> org.laptop.Memorize 16.229 13.243 0.539 0.816 24
> org.laptop.Oficina 10.421 9.490 0.431 0.911 24
> org.laptop.Pippy 6.421 6.150 0.050 0.958 24
> org.laptop.RecordActivity 12.563 11.179 0.346 0.890 24
> org.laptop.TamTamMini 16.676 14.414 0.338 0.864 24
> org.laptop.WebActivity 23.335 14.260 0.241 0.611 24
> tv.alterna.Clock 8.782 8.631 0.067 0.983 24
> vu.lux.olpc.Maze 11.699 8.731 0.269 0.746 24
> vu.lux.olpc.Speak 15.187 11.460 0.261 0.755 24
>
> For Sugar 0.98 the results by activity were:
>
> bundle_id cold warm std ratio tests
>
> com.garycmartin.Moon 12.946 11.039 0.372 0.853 24
> com.jotaro.ImplodeActivity 11.494 11.352 0.499 0.988 24
> org.laptop.AbiWordActivity 26.611 21.501 1.041 0.808 24
> org.laptop.AcousticMeasure 14.865 12.949 0.351 0.871 24
> org.laptop.Calculate 12.063 10.220 0.207 0.847 24
> org.laptop.HelpActivity 18.378 11.101 0.311 0.604 24
> org.laptop.MeasureActivity 19.566 13.791 0.308 0.705 24
> org.laptop.Memorize 20.977 14.462 0.791 0.689 24
> org.laptop.Oficina 14.216 13.948 0.246 0.981 24
> org.laptop.Pippy 11.793 10.983 0.141 0.931 24
> org.laptop.RecordActivity 18.459 13.165 0.514 0.713 24
> org.laptop.sugar.Jukebox 16.346 11.466 0.292 0.701 24
> org.laptop.sugar.ReadActivity 16.407 13.253 0.597 0.808 24
> org.laptop.TamTamMini 20.218 16.475 0.638 0.815 24
> org.laptop.WebActivity 22.427 14.587 0.329 0.650 24
> tv.alterna.Clock 9.943 7.377 0.264 0.742 24
> vu.lux.olpc.Maze 14.243 10.198 0.785 0.716 24
> vu.lux.olpc.Speak 22.032 13.281 1.150 0.603 24
>
> For Sugar 0.104 the results by activity were:
>
> bundle_id cold warm std ratio tests
>
> com.garycmartin.Moon 11.928 10.294 0.492 0.863 24
> com.jotaro.ImplodeActivity 9.084 9.017 0.498 0.993 24
> org.laptop.AbiWordActivity 20.868 16.862 0.376 0.808 24
> org.laptop.AcousticMeasure 12.330 10.513 0.137 0.853 24
> org.laptop.Calculate 11.591 9.920 0.120 0.856 24
> org.laptop.HelpActivity 14.654 8.981 0.329 0.613 24
> org.laptop.MeasureActivity 16.381 11.364 0.135 0.694 24
> org.laptop.Memorize 17.961 14.550 0.183 0.810 24
> org.laptop.Oficina 12.231 12.029 0.351 0.983 24
> org.laptop.Pippy 8.752 8.202 0.128 0.937 24
> org.laptop.RecordActivity 16.956 12.652 0.145 0.746 24
> org.laptop.sugar.Jukebox 9.666 8.986 0.108 0.930 24
> org.laptop.sugar.ReadActivity 11.296 10.477 0.165 0.928 24
> org.laptop.TamTamMini 18.628 14.734 0.576 0.791 24
> org.laptop.WebActivity 19.425 12.527 0.217 0.645 24
> tv.alterna.Clock 10.061 7.124 0.123 0.708 24
> vu.lux.olpc.Maze 8.366 8.265 0.120 0.988 24
> vu.lux.olpc.Speak 24.555 12.075 0.208 0.492 24
>
> (Reference: test #6)
>
> --
>
> The testing scripts can be made available if anybody else would like
> to replicate the results.
>
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.linux.org.au/
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150409/1b44f7d1/attachment.html>
More information about the Devel
mailing list