Re: Comparison of notail and notail,iicache(14) 2.4.19-pre7

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Manuel Krause wrote:

> On 04/25/2002 12:25 AM, Manuel Krause wrote:
>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> I tried the patch linux-2.4.19p6-iicache-new-14.patch on 2.4.19-pre7 
>> in addition to Olegs first speedup patches, some AA and AKPM ones and 
>> made a comparison of my backup timings:
>>
>> /dev/hda11             5550248   4804584    745664  87% /mnt/beta
>>
>> noatime,notail:
>> ---------------
>> to udma-33       real   9m46.648s   user 0m1.970s   sys 1m45.070s
>>                         7.800 MB/s      (used FS)
>>            back to udma-66  real  11m 7.432s   user 0m1.940s   sys 
>> 1m43.530s
>>                         7.030 MB/s      (unused FS)
>>     noatime,notail,iicache (new-14):
>> --------------------------------
>> to udma-33       real   9m38.230s    user 0m1.970s   sys 1m48.670s
>>                         8.114 MB/s      (unused FS)
>>                                  +1.45% rate (first copy)
>>                back to udma-66  real  10m54.870s    user 0m2.230s   
>> sys 1m46.280s
>>                         7.165 MB/s      (unused FS)
>>                              +1.92% rate (second copy)
>> 020424 23:55
>>
>>
>> File size distribution statistics are available upon requst.
>>
>
>
> Sorry, I just see I've always forgotten to mention I use RMLs preempt 
> + lock-break patches, too. More info upon a stable configuration on 
> this setup for dd backups and VMware sessions - just mail. (Just in 
> case someone faced same problems I did.)
>
> Thanks
> and best wishes, again,
>
>
>
> Manuel
>
>
>
>
Manuel, when you combine this many patches, and compare them all 
combined to no patches, it becomes hard to say exactly which patches are 
worth accepting into the main line even if all combined they are faster.

Hans