LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <chris@scary.beasts.org>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: VM: 2.4.10ac4 vs. 2.4.11pre2
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 13:20:23 +0100 (BST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110061252450.17262-100000@sphinx.mythic-beasts.com> (raw)


Hi,

Here are some test results. Results are averaged over multiple runs.
Comments and conclusions below.

                     2.4.11pre2        2.4.10ac4
dbench 8             34Mbyte/sec       40Mbyte/sec
dbench 32            7.7Mbyte/sec      14Mbyte/sec
bonnie++ write       17.5Mbyte/sec     18Mbyte/sec
bonnie++ rewrite     5.6Mbyte/sec      5.8Mbyte/sec
bonnie++ read        24Mbyte/sec       24.5Mbyte/sec
kernel stress build  212min24s         229m54s
linear swap test     1m30s             2m15s
bonnie++ creat()     7200              9600  [*]
bonnie++ stat()      2100              9000  [*]
bonnie++ unlink()    5300              30000 [*]

[*] either the ext2 directory optimization in 2.4.10ac is influencing the
test, or 2.4.11pre2 VM has a problem caching inodes.

Comments + conclusions
----------------------

- The 2.4.11pre2 VM is considerably more stable, where "stable" is defined
as repeatable test scores and consistent performance. The 2.4.10ac4 VM is
all over the place.

- Both kernels exhibit similar interactive response under load.

- The 2.4.11pre2 VM performs substantially better in tests which invoke
swapping.

- Surprisingly, the 2.4.10ac4 kernel does much much better at dbench. The
2.4.11pre2 performance is alleged to have regressed since 2.4.10pre10?

- I have not tried 2.4.11pre4, but the report of streaming i/o causing
swapping is concerning.


Note that the above results were generated using a very simple (and
extensible) script. VM developers would do well to spend the 30 seconds
writing a similar script, and post results along with proposed VM patches.

Cheers
Chris


             reply	other threads:[~2001-10-06 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-10-06 12:20 chris [this message]
2001-10-06 19:05 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-06 19:50   ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-06 22:36 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-06 19:09 Alexei Podtelezhnikov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.33.0110061252450.17262-100000@sphinx.mythic-beasts.com \
    --to=chris@scary.beasts.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: VM: 2.4.10ac4 vs. 2.4.11pre2' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).