[Info-vax] VMS x86 performance ?

[Dave Froble]

On 10/30/2020 1:04 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>
> On 10/30/20 8:24 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2020-10-30, geze... at rlgsc.com <gezelter at rlgsc.com> wrote:
>
>>> Working with preliminary cross compilers?  Early field test software?
>>>
>>
>> The compilers are only one part of this.
>>
>> Ian is very, very correct. We should be getting some initial indications
>> by now, especially for I/O bound workloads, where the compilers are far
>> less important.
>>
>> For example, tests from RMS could compare Alpha/Itanium performance
>> with x86-64 (and associated I/O hardware) performance.
>
> Which would be meaningless because RMS is software that is getting
> compiled with non-optimized cross compilers, and other parts of the I/O
> path are also compiled software. Disk I/O and network I/O have
> traditionally been much slower on VMS than on other OSs running on the
> same hardware, especially with default settings, so the difference
> pretty much has to be in software, which is currently getting compiled
> with rough-and-ready cross compilers.  Your impatience has no impact on
> how the technology actually works.
>
>> We are _6_ _years_ into the port! How much longer are people going to
>> have to wait ?

Until it is ready?  What else is there to do?

> At least until v9.1, but don't get your hopes up even then.  v9.1 is
> scheduled for the first half of next year. While the compilers will be
> native, I don't know if optimizations will be available in compilers
> provided with the initial EAK (and the compiler engineers may not know
> yet either). There may very well be an agreement that comes with
> downloading the EAK that forbids public posting of benchmarks.

I would not bother.  Why?  It really does not matter.

> It is certainly frustrating that the port is taking a long time. But the
> original projection of a two-year port beginning in 2015 was predicated
> on having a team of 70 doing the port, on not doing Alpha releases, and
> probably not doing a bunch of other things they have ended up having to
> do but weren't initially planning on doing before the port.  I don't
> know how many people are working on the port, but I'm guessing it isn't 70.

Well, yes, an Alpha release, as you mention.  And why, because it was 
what the paying customers wanted.  Apparently they are a bit happier 
than the loose lips on c.o.v.

Then there was taking over all VMS support.  A big job, and quite 
possibly a good source of revenue.

> The sharply narrowed focus of the latest roadmap suggests that they are
> doubling down on the port and making it a top priority. There will
> certainly be some opportunities lost by the fact that the first
> production release on x86_64 is still a year away (if all goes according
> to the current plan). But I have a hard time believing that anyone is
> more eager to have it done than the people doing it. So complaining in
> the newsgroup about how long it's taking is probably not going to make
> it happen faster (though I admit I have certainly done some complaining
> myself).

I really haven't seen much complaining by paying customers.  Then again, 
perhaps it isn't so easy to see, if it happens.

If VSI is going to succeed, it will be because of sufficient revenue, 
not by catering to those non-paying customers complaining on c.o.v.

The people at VSI are the same people who have successfully provided 
what I have needed for the last 42 years.  Why would I now doubt them?

-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486