From: Michael Clark <michael@metaparadigm.com>
To: Denis Vlasenko <vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.9 page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0x20
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:26:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41810FAB.40107@metaparadigm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200410281129.09810.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua>
On 10/28/04 16:29, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On Thursday 28 October 2004 08:31, Michael Clark wrote:
>
>>BTW - 2.6 is much more responsive than 2.4 while this is all
>>going on - i'm just worried about these messages.
>
>
> Which one was faster, and by how much?
Both tests compiling 2.6.9 tree with make -j192 bzImage modules
(.config posted earlier) from clean source after a reboot.
2CPUs, 2GB RAM, 2GB swap
2.4.27
real 15m38.504s
user 21m5.720s
sys 3m28.990s
peaked at about 1.7GB swap usage
2.6.9
real 14m50.360s
user 21m9.008s
sys 2m40.580s
peaked at 2.0GB swap usage - top said 0K swap free and it survived ;)
2.6.9 was 5% faster (although subjectively almost a magnitude more
responsive ie. sshing into the box in the middle of this took
about a minute with 2.4.27 and only about 10 or so seconds with 2.6.9,
although i didn't time this).
Seems 2.6's more proactive swapping helps a bit ie. swap more of
the right stuff so as to swap less overall as 2.6 went about 20%
deeper into swap.
~mc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-28 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-28 5:31 2.6.9 page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0x20 Michael Clark
2004-10-28 5:56 ` Michael Clark
2004-10-28 6:02 ` Michael Clark
2004-10-28 7:18 ` Daniel Phillips
2004-10-28 8:29 ` Denis Vlasenko
2004-10-28 15:26 ` Michael Clark [this message]
2004-10-28 9:40 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-28 14:11 ` Michael Clark
2004-10-28 14:47 ` Michael Clark
2004-10-28 19:51 ` Andrew Morton
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=41810FAB.40107@metaparadigm.com \
--to=michael@metaparadigm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua \
/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