Yep. Nothing to see here
"Benchmarking OS X semaphores vs message passing".
Shared memory + spinlocks should be much faster than shared memory + semaphores (much faster, if implemented properly, e.g. spinlock + timeout, on timeout queue another message, again spinlock and try to copy all the elements, etc.).
Paper here: http://mcvoy.com/lm/bitmover/lmbench/lmbench-usenix.pdf
BTW, if someone has a better starting point, please share. lmbench is just what I happen to know.
Sorry for being rude.
As an article it's not particularly clear in method or presentation. It's not especially clear in what it's measuring, process, isolation of variables. But it's not attempting to be a journal article. So that's not what I meant about "needs work" (though it is hard to pull the message out of the wording).
But I don't think it supports your thesis. Again, thats part of what the web is about (not every posting should be a well polished pearl) so I"m glad you posted this. If you cared though, I'd improve your process. This post might not be worth rewriting though -- that's up to you.
There are no graphs, how is this a benchmark?
BTW a literal mark on a bench is just that.
I remember macOS.
Mac OS -> Mac OS X -> OS X -> macOS.