From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:01:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:01:55 -0500 Received: from thebsh.namesys.com ([212.16.7.65]:21639 "HELO thebsh.namesys.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:01:54 -0500 Message-ID: <3E3AAE34.3000802@namesys.com> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 20:11:16 +0300 From: Hans Reiser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Jones CC: Con Kolivas , linux kernel mailing list Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] ext3, reiser, jfs, xfs effect on contest References: <200302010020.34119.conman@kolivas.net> <3E3A7C22.1080709@namesys.com> <200302010040.49141.conman@kolivas.net> <3E3A8077.9050409@namesys.com> <20030131152156.GA15977@codemonkey.org.uk> <3E3AA6F6.3090504@namesys.com> <20030131164711.GA18147@codemonkey.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20030131164711.GA18147@codemonkey.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dave Jones wrote: >On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 07:40:22PM +0300, Hans Reiser wrote: > > > >> Try running with the -E option for gcc, it might be less CPU intensive, > > >> and thus a better FS benchmark. > > >> What do you think? > > >It's hardly a realistic real-world benchmark if you start nobbling > > >bits of it though. Not reading the preprocessed output is sure > > >to bump the benchmark points on an fs optimised for lots of small > > >writes. > > Sigh. The alternative is to strace the compile, write a perl scipt or > > something to get just the FS related calls out of it, and then create a > > program with just the FS related calls. gcc -E sounds easier to me.;-) > >It still seems like perverting a benchmark to turn it into dbench to me. > > Dave > > > Easier is not always correct.;-) We need better benchmarks in our field, sigh.... and correct ones are really a lot of work.... -- Hans