From: Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Quick update on latest Linux kernel performance
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 07:12:48 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050920141248.55369.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200509132132.j8DLWJg04553@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
--- "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
wrote:
> New performance result are posted on
> http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net
> with latest data collected on kernel
> 2.6.13-git9.
>
> Kernel-build bench are fairly stable over the
> last 14 kernel versions
> or so. It was consistently 3-5% better on
> x86_64 over baseline 2.6.9
> kernel. It showed a lot smaller gain on ia64
> though.
>
> Java business benchmark showed very little
> change in performance on all
> kernel versions.
>
> Volanomark took some heavy performance hit
> during 2.6.12-rc* period, but
> come back in 2.6.13 on x86_64 configuration.
> Though latest 2.6.13-git9
> showed a little bit perf. regression.
>
> Netperf is showing wildly result, especially
> the 1-byte request/response
> component. Overall, UDP portion Of the netperf
> are showing nice improvement
> over baseline 2.6.9 kernel.
>
> Industry standard transaction processing
> database workload still suffering
> 13% performance regression with 2.6.13. (data
> will be posted in a separate mail)
>
> Take a look at the performance data. Comments
> and suggestions are always
> welcome and please post them to LKML.
Does it still drop packets when only running at
15% utilization?
Did you run data streams through the box while
doing these tests? There's a difference between
gaining performance in a benchmark and just
shifting performance from one activity to
another. If the latter is the case, then there's
been no progress at all. I keep seeing all these
great benchmark results, and linux keeps dropping
more and more packets as the versions increase.
Its become practically unusable as a specialized
networking appliance.
Danial
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-20 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-13 21:32 Quick update on latest Linux kernel performance Chen, Kenneth W
2005-09-14 6:17 ` Chris White
2005-09-14 16:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-09-15 7:15 ` Helge Hafting
2005-09-20 14:12 ` Danial Thom [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-09-15 17:39 Felix Oxley
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=20050920141248.55369.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
--to=danial_thom@yahoo.com \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.