Re: 2.6.0-test9 - poor swap performance on low end machines

William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-18T23:39:46Z

On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:53:25PM +0100, Roger Luethi wrote:
> Depends on the axis in your graph. The benchmarks I am using are not
> balancing on the verge of going bad, if that's what you mean. They
> cut deep (30 to 100 MB) into swap through most of their run time,
> and there's quite a bit of swap turnover with compiling stuff.
> I also completed a best effort attempt at determining the impact of
> any differences between mem= and actual RAM removal. I had to adapt
> the kbuild benchmark somewhat to the available hardware. I benchmarked
> with 48 MB RAM at mem=16M and again after removing 32MB of RAM. If there
> was a difference in performance, it was very small for both 2.4.23 and
> 2.6.0-test11, with the latter taking over 2.5 times as long to complete
> the benchmark.

A bogon was recently fixed in 2.6 that caused the results to differ.
They should not differ.

-- wli