From: J Sloan <jjs@pobox.com>
To: timothy.covell@ashavan.org
Cc: "Stephan von Krawczynski" <skraw@ithnet.com>,
"Davide Libenzi" <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
"Dieter Nützel" <Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de>,
"Robert Love" <rml@tech9.net>,
"Linux Kernel List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Balanced Multi Queue Scheduler ...
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:47:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C2F7D49.9040606@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200112292338.AAA29985@webserver.ithnet.com> <200112301951.fBUJoxSr011753@svr3.applink.net>
Timothy Covell wrote:
>Ummm, on my Dual P-III (650MHz with 524988416 Bytes), my current Seti
>efficiency is 5.35 CpF. That's a tad high/slower than an Ultra Sparc IIi
>according to their stats. So, it would appear that being SMP is hurting my
>performance a bit. Unless that is that you meant to run a seti instance for
>each CPU? And this reminds me of how "make -j3 bzlilo" is slower than
>"make -j2 bzlilo".
>
Eh?
On my 4-way ppro, make -j4 is much faster
than a simple "make" for kernel compilation.
Almost linearly so -
This is with recent 2.4.1x kernels BTW on
Red Hat 7.1/7.2
Sorry to hear of your bizzare experiences -
but then again, maybe you're running a
2.2.x kernel or something?
cu
jjs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-30 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-29 5:16 [PATCH] Balanced Multi Queue Scheduler Dieter Nützel
2001-12-29 22:29 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-29 22:49 ` Andrew Morton
2001-12-29 23:39 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-29 23:38 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-12-30 0:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 2:32 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-30 3:11 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-12-30 19:47 ` Timothy Covell
2001-12-30 20:16 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 23:20 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-12-30 23:46 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-31 16:37 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-12-31 17:26 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 20:47 ` J Sloan [this message]
2001-12-30 20:53 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 21:12 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-30 23:16 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2002-01-14 1:33 ` Bill Davidsen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-12-29 3:53 Davide Libenzi
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=3C2F7D49.9040606@pobox.com \
--to=jjs@pobox.com \
--cc=Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=skraw@ithnet.com \
--cc=timothy.covell@ashavan.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