From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Comparison of notail and notail,iicache(14) 2.4.19-pre7 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:37:29 +0400 Message-ID: <3CC7DC69.4060302@namesys.com> References: <3CC730DC.1000602@mb.tu-ilmenau.de> <3CC736DC.3060300@mb.tu-ilmenau.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Manuel Krause Cc: reiserfs-list 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