public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Peloquin <peloquin@austin.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linstab <linstab@osdl.org>,
	ltp-results <ltp-results@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.20 vs 2.5.71 comparison
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 21:18:04 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EF11D5C.3030808@austin.ibm.com> (raw)



Thought some of you might get a kick out of seeing this. :)

Nightly Regression Summary
for
2.4.20 vs 2.5.71


Benchmark         Pass/Fail   Improvements   Regressions       Results       Results   Summary
---------------   ---------   ------------   -----------   -----------   -----------   -------

dbench.ext2           P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
dbench.ext3           P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
dbench.jfs            P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
dbench.reiser         P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
dbench.xfs            P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
kernbench             P            N              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
lmbench               P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
rawiobench            P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
specjbb               P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
specsdet              P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
tbench                P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
tiobench.ext2         P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
tiobench.ext3         P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
tiobench.jfs          P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
tiobench.reiser       P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
tiobench.xfs          P            Y              Y             2.4.20        2.5.71    report
volanomark            P            Y              N             2.4.20        2.5.71    report

http://ltcperf.ncsa.uiuc.edu/data/2.5.71/2.4.20-vs-2.5.71/

Mark




                 reply	other threads:[~2003-06-19  2:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=3EF11D5C.3030808@austin.ibm.com \
    --to=peloquin@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=linstab@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltp-results@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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