From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Cc: Steven Cole <elenstev@mesatop.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>, Steven Cole <scole@lanl.gov>
Subject: Re: Linux v2.4.19-rc5
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 07:42:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020806054258.GJ3975@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1020805234423.4423A-100000@gatekeeper.tmr.com>
On Mon, Aug 05 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2002, Steven Cole wrote:
>
> > Here are some dbench numbers, from the "for what it's worth" department.
> > This was done with SMP kernels, on a dual p3 box, SCSI disk, ext2.
> > The first column is dbench clients. The numbers are throughput
> > in MB/sec. The 2.5.29 kernel had a few RR-supplied smp fixes.
> > Looks like for this limited test, 2.4.19-rc5 holds up pretty well.
> > I've also ran this set of tests several times on -rc5 using ext3
> > and data=writeback, and everything looks fine.
> >
> > Steven
>
> Call me an optimist, but after all the reliability problems we had win the
> 2.5 series, I sort of hoped it would be better in performance, not
> increasingly worse. Am I misreading this? Can we fall back to the faster
> 2.4 code :-(
try a work load that excercises the block i/o layer alone (O_DIRECT,
raw, whatnot) and then compare 2.4 and 2.5. ibm had some slides on this
from ols, unfortunately I don't know if they have then online.
please don't put too much wait in dbench numbers for this sort of thing
:-)
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-08-06 5:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-08-01 6:38 Linux v2.4.19-rc5 Marcelo Tosatti
2002-08-01 7:49 ` Jens Axboe
2002-08-01 7:14 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2002-08-01 8:10 ` Jens Axboe
2002-08-01 9:02 ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-01 8:58 ` Jens Axboe
2002-08-01 14:45 ` Steven Cole
2002-08-01 18:57 ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-01 20:15 ` Steven Cole
2002-08-06 3:46 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-06 4:30 ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-06 14:07 ` Steven Cole
2002-08-06 14:20 ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-06 17:12 ` Andrew Morton
2002-08-06 5:42 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2002-08-06 8:30 ` Adrian Bunk
2002-08-06 8:48 ` Jens Axboe
2002-08-06 10:31 ` Lincoln Dale
2002-08-06 12:59 ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-07 1:09 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-07 2:54 ` Steven Cole
2002-08-07 22:30 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-07 22:39 ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-07 23:44 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-07 23:53 ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-09 17:46 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-09 19:27 ` Rik van Riel
2002-08-01 7:55 ` Keith Owens
2002-08-01 8:10 ` Jens Axboe
2002-08-04 6:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-08-01 11:32 ` Willy TARREAU
2002-08-01 13:54 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 12:48 ` Willy TARREAU
2002-08-01 12:12 ` Linux v2.4.19-rc5 - APM bug Willy TARREAU
2002-08-01 13:32 ` [PANIC] APM bug with -rc4 and -rc5 Willy TARREAU
2002-08-01 14:55 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 13:56 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-08-01 15:24 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-08-01 16:53 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 16:41 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-08-01 20:35 ` [PATCH] solved APM bug with -rc5 Willy TARREAU
2002-08-01 20:52 ` Richard Gooch
2002-08-01 20:54 ` Richard Gooch
2002-08-01 21:17 ` Willy TARREAU
2002-08-01 22:37 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 20:58 ` Dave Jones
2002-08-01 22:16 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-01 21:07 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-08-01 21:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-08-02 0:12 ` [PATCH] solved APM bug with -rc5 (take 2) Willy TARREAU
2002-08-02 1:47 ` [PATCH] pdc20265 problem Nick Orlov
2002-08-02 2:29 ` Nick Orlov
2002-08-02 12:27 ` Alan Cox
2002-08-02 12:52 ` Nick Orlov
2002-08-02 14:00 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2002-08-02 14:45 ` Nick Orlov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-08-06 4:36 Linux v2.4.19-rc5 rwhron
2002-08-07 3:00 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-08-06 20:12 Peter Wong
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=20020806054258.GJ3975@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=elenstev@mesatop.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=scole@lanl.gov \
/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