EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  <19971998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  <19971998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: medm/dm performance comparison
From: Matt Bickley <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 16:00:45 EST
--- Begin Message ---
>
>      Finally, there seems to be a popular conception that MEDM is
> slower than DM.  Informal testing, however, has indicated that their
> runtime performance is very similar.  Older versions of MEDM were
> noticeably slower to start up with very large (over 1 MB) ADL files.
> This version has not been tested against DM with those files.  Both
> programs will continue to be developed, and an attempt will be made to
> keep their features consistent.  It should be noted that the version
> of MEDM released by DESY is not part of this MEDM distribution

   In response to Ken's email regarding medm performance, I made some quick
measurements comparing medm and dm.  I started both programs, brought up
the same 4 screens in each one, left them alone for about half an hour, then
terminated the programs.  We use medm here at Jefferson Lab, so for the test I
used the conversion utilities written by Deb Kerstiens and Dave Wetherholt to
generate the dm ".dl" files from the medm ".adl" files we use in operations.

   The quantities measured during the test were the total CPU time that each
program consumed, the total memory usage on the host CPU, and the memory usage
that each one consumed on the xterminal, which runs the X server hosting the
display:

                CPU usage      memory usage       memory usage on xterminal
               on host CPU     on host CPU        (running the X server)

medm              409 sec        674 KB                 2200 KB
(version 2.1.2)

dm                330 sec        406 KB                  180 KB
(version 2.4)


   The screens used in the test consisted only of text update boxes.  It would
be interesting to see similar performance measurements generated from more
graphics-intensive screens.

--
Matthew Bickley                                       Email: [email protected]
Computer Scientist                                   Voice mail: 757-269-7347
TJNAF

--- End Message ---

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: MEDM 2.3.3 Gabor Csuka
Next: Re: MEDM 2.3.3 Roland Mueller
Index: 1994  1995  1996  <19971998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Keithley and EPICS Jan Chrin
Next: Re: medm/dm performance comparison Ken Evans
Index: 1994  1995  1996  <19971998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 10 Aug 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·