All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Samium Gromoff <deepfire@sic-elvis.zel.ru>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: [TEST] 2.4 vs 2.6.2 vs 2.6.2-mm1 vs 2.6.2-rc3-mm1
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:57:46 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <873c9kz4et.wl@canopus.ns.zel.ru> (raw)


Here are the tests i`ve promised, and sorry for the delays.

The test machine was a pIII-600/192M RAM/10krpm SCSI drive.

There was three different loads.

the test app whose run time was measured was:

time find / -xdev | \
	bzip2 --compress | bzip2 --decompress | \
	bzip2 --compress | bzip2 --decompress | \
	bzip2 --compress | bzip2 --decompress | \
	cat > /dev/null

the loads were:

Load 1:
	boot options: mem=32M init=/bin/bash
	swapon -a
	run the test

Load 2:
	boot options: mem=48M init=/bin/bash
	swapon -a
	run the test

Load 3:
	boot options: mem=48M
	usual X session, with lots of terminals, emacs and stuff
	the test was run from one of the x terminal emulators

the kernels were:
	2.4.20-pre9, 2.6.2 -- no comments
	2.6.2-rc3-mm1 -- that one didn`t include the Namesys VM patches
	2.6.2--mm1 -- that one _did_ include the Namesys VM patches

results:


		2.4.20-pre9	2.6.2		2.6.2-mm1	2.6.2-rc3-mm1

Load 1
  run1		6.27		9.14		9.42		10.52

Load 2
  run1		3.29		4.42		3.40		3.45
  run2		3.28		4.37		3.39		3.45

Load 3
  run1		4.42		8.39		18.26


short summary:

	2.4 is faster.


regards, Samium Gromoff



             reply	other threads:[~2004-02-09 15:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-09 14:57 Samium Gromoff [this message]
2004-02-09 15:46 ` [TEST] 2.4 vs 2.6.2 vs 2.6.2-mm1 vs 2.6.2-rc3-mm1 Samium Gromoff
2004-02-10 12:53 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-10 13:33   ` Samium Gromoff

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=873c9kz4et.wl@canopus.ns.zel.ru \
    --to=deepfire@sic-elvis.zel.ru \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
    /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.