From: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
To: "Bond, Andrew" <Andrew.Bond@hp.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TPC-C benchmark used standard RH kernel
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 13:40:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D8A3654.50201@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 45B36A38D959B44CB032DA427A6E106402D09E43@cceexc18.americas.cpqcorp.net
Bond, Andrew wrote:
> This isn't as recent as I would like, but it will give you an idea.
> Top 75 from readprofile. This run was not using bigpages though.
>
> 00000000 total 7872 0.0066
> c0105400 default_idle 1367 21.3594
> c012ea20 find_vma_prev 462 2.2212
> c0142840 create_bounce 378 1.1250
> c0142540 bounce_end_io_read 332 0.9881
> c0197740 __make_request 256 0.1290
> c012af20 zap_page_range 231 0.1739
> c012e9a0 find_vma 214 1.6719
> c012e780 avl_rebalance 160 0.4762
> c0118d80 schedule 157 0.1609
> c010ba50 do_gettimeofday 145 1.0069
> c0130c30 __find_lock_page 144 0.4500
> c0119150 __wake_up 142 0.9861
> c01497c0 end_buffer_io_kiobuf_async 140 0.6250
> c0113020 flush_tlb_mm 128 1.0000
> c0168000 proc_pid_stat 125 0.2003
Forgive my complete ignorane about TPC-C... Why do you have so much
idle time? Are you I/O bound? (with that many disks, I sure hope not
:) ) Or is it as simple as leaving profiling running for a bit before
or after the benchmark was run?
Earlier, I got a little over-excited because I thinking that the
machines under test were 8-ways, but it looks like the DL580 is a
4xPIII-Xeon, and you have 8 of them. I know you haven't published it,
but do you do any testing on 8-ways?
For most of our work (Specweb, dbench, plain kernel compiles), the
kernel tends to blow up a lot worse at 8 CPUs than 4. It really dies
on the 32-way NUMA-Qs, but that's a whole other story...
--
Dave Hansen
haveblue@us.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-19 20:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-19 19:27 TPC-C benchmark used standard RH kernel Bond, Andrew
2002-09-19 20:40 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2002-09-20 17:20 ` Mike Anderson
2002-09-20 17:31 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-20 18:05 ` Mike Anderson
2002-09-20 20:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-09-20 22:07 ` Martin J. Bligh
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-09-20 17:43 Bond, Andrew
2002-09-19 21:18 Bond, Andrew
2002-09-19 21:48 ` Dave Hansen
2002-09-19 19:15 Bond, Andrew
2002-09-19 17:15 Bond, Andrew
2002-09-19 18:14 ` Dave Hansen
2002-09-19 19:05 ` Martin J. Bligh
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=3D8A3654.50201@us.ibm.com \
--to=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=Andrew.Bond@hp.com \
--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