[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7293) Performance of Freeciv

["Raimar Falke" <i-freeciv-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7293 >

On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 02:12:59AM -0800, Christian Knoke wrote:
> 
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7293 >
> 
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 01:26:05AM -0800, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > 
> > I would like to eliminate a lot of this resource wastage by defining a
> > minimum hardware requirement and a performance guarantee for this.
> 
> > Stronly related to this are the questions:
> >  - what are currently the slowest systems where freeciv is used and
> >  - are the speed on these systems acceptable and
> >  - if not where is freeciv slow?
> 
> The bottleneck is the client. Actually I don't have acceptable response
> times for certain actions in GTK 1, on a 200 MHz K6 with fast PCI gfx.
> The bottleneck is the CPU.

What actions?

> So I think it's a good guess to use a P3-500 at minimum. But even then
> certains (CMA related) actions may be slow (take several seconds). See my

Yes CMA is a major calculation and isn't fast. If your computer is too
you can't use it. There is not much I (we) can do here except using
another algorithm.

> related bug reports. These slownesses have been introduced in CVS, and are
> not present in 1.14.1. For 1.14.1 the hardware specified above is
> sufficient.

GCC has release criteria. http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.3/criteria.html:

  A release candidate's compile-time should not exceed GCC 2.95.3 by
  more than 15%, and peak memory usage should not exceed that of GCC
  2.95.3 by more than 25%.

It looks like we also have to do this.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  The Software is not designed or licensed for use in on-line control
  equipment in hazardous environments, such as operation of nuclear
  facilities, aircraft navigation or control, or direct life support
  machines. 
    -- Java Compiler Compiler Download and License Agreement