From: Ed Sweetman <ed.sweetman@wmich.edu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: 2.4.18-pre3-ac2 spiffyness
Date: 17 Jan 2002 19:19:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1011313147.13035.54.camel@psuedomode> (raw)
Well, in all my graph creating and kernels tested, I've never seen
anything so clean as what I have seen in this kernel. I haven't tested
it completely but all those arguments from the bsd and other kernel
people about vm instability is thrown to the wayside with this one.
Check out this http://safemode.homeip.net/2.4.18-pre3-ac2_mem.png I
must say I was surprised to see something so clean looking for a testing
sample where I was doing so much.
Just to mention again what these graphs are based on: I do my testing
with my actual load, no synthetic pretend loads that I never see or
doing things that I'll never do again, or running programs that try and
simulate what I do. I dont see the point in benchmarking for loads,
there's always some combination you can't think of when you find a
benchmark. Everyone interested should just do their worst and describe
what they did to get the numbers they got. More quantitative reports
and less of that qualitative "it feels" nice reports. yup.
What was done:
prior to starting vmstat I was running cdparanoia -B "1-" on a non-dma
cdrom (less dma timeouts and atapi resets that way). Decoding and
playing vorbis files while jumping between desktops loaded with
terminals and mozilla/Evolution. Browsing websites and scrolling them
while traversing huge email directories in evolution. All the while
xawtv is playing fullscreen using xv. (not to mention various non-gui
apps that aren't really impacting the system).
any Conclusions:
So far I've seen nothing wrong with it. Anyone who wants the vmstat
output can email me for it. It's far too soon to make any real
conclusions about the subsystems or anything yet though. Haven't
checked to see the plain 2.4.18-pre3 kernel behavior but I will once I
get everything back in order and have some free time. I just couldn't
wait to see what other people thought of this kind of smooth behavior.
I'm not giving as much info as prior kernels due to my school being
network nazi's. Funny, you goto college seeking knowledge but you're
disabled from sharing any of your own. +1 to ipv4 and college.
reply other threads:[~2002-01-18 0:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=1011313147.13035.54.camel@psuedomode \
--to=ed.sweetman@wmich.edu \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox