I made test in several cases. It’s the same than the previous message: the make step of Python compilation.
There are no real difference between using the disk and using tmpfs so I guess the compilation is done in memory in each cases:
- Debian host:
| ext4 | tmpfs | |
|---|---|---|
| real | 2m53 | 2m53 |
| user | 2m42 | 2m42 |
| sys | 0m | 0m10 |
- Debian buster container:
| zfs | tmpfs | |
|---|---|---|
| real | 3m01 | 2m59 |
| user | 2m47 | 2m46 |
| sys | 0m13 | 0m12 |
- Alpinelinux container:
| zfs | tmpfs | |
|---|---|---|
| real | 5m13 | 5m13 |
| user | 4m40 | 4m40 |
| sys | 0m33 | 0m32 |
Commands used with tmpfs:
mkdir /tmp/stephane.tmpfs
sudo mount -t tmpfs tmpfs /tmp/stephane.tmpfs -o size=1g
cp -r Python-3.7.12 /tmp/stephane.tmpfs
cd /tmp/stephane.tmpfs
./configure
time make
For the next steps, I will:
- measure time of
synccommand after the compilation - compare kernel scheduler as you suggest
- search if there are known speed differences between glibc (used by Debian) and musl (used by Alpinelinux)
Do you think about these steps ?