This is considered a benchmark and comparison?<p>Edit: Ok, rather than being an arse, some feedback:
The IOWait tidbit was interesting and worth the click on its own.<p>Build times and bandwidth should vary based on usage on the shared host. Run the tests every 3 hours for 2-3 days and use those results.<p>More interesting information would consist of what your plan of attack will be for scaling with more power/storage/etc. If necessity dictates the need for more, will it be as easy as a few clicks (and $$$$) with DO as compared to Azure/Amazon?
Can you please post the benchmark technique to allow for reproduction?<p>My colleagues and I often use client's hardware rather than our own to work on their project. The mono source sounds like a good stress test to guague the pain and implement preventative upgrades early in the piece.<p>For comparison's sake, `time make` of mono-3.2.1 from tarball on a 2012 Macbook Pro Retina / 2.6GHz / 16 GB RAM / 512 GB SSD returns:<p><pre><code> make 583.12s user 77.90s system 98% cpu 11:11.99 total
</code></pre>
This seems slow compared to digital ocean. I wonder if there's something I'm not setting. My settings per [1] were:<p><pre><code> ./configure --prefix=/Users/joshka/Code/mono --enable-nls=no --build=i386-apple-darwin11.2.0
</code></pre>
[1]: <a href="http://www.mono-project.com/Compiling_Mono_on_OSX" rel="nofollow">http://www.mono-project.com/Compiling_Mono_on_OSX</a>
Those micro articles about DO start to annoy as much as 'github down' ones. Three up-votes and already on front page... Something is not right here. I have nothing against DO (I use them too), but if site is on front page I would like to see much more detailed benchmarks.