public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Samium Gromoff <deepfire@sic-elvis.zel.ru>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: [TEST] 2.4 vs 2.6.2 vs 2.6.2-mm1 vs 2.6.2-rc3-mm1
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:57:46 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <873c9kz4et.wl@canopus.ns.zel.ru> (raw)


Here are the tests i`ve promised, and sorry for the delays.

The test machine was a pIII-600/192M RAM/10krpm SCSI drive.

There was three different loads.

the test app whose run time was measured was:

time find / -xdev | \
	bzip2 --compress | bzip2 --decompress | \
	bzip2 --compress | bzip2 --decompress | \
	bzip2 --compress | bzip2 --decompress | \
	cat > /dev/null

the loads were:

Load 1:
	boot options: mem=32M init=/bin/bash
	swapon -a
	run the test

Load 2:
	boot options: mem=48M init=/bin/bash
	swapon -a
	run the test

Load 3:
	boot options: mem=48M
	usual X session, with lots of terminals, emacs and stuff
	the test was run from one of the x terminal emulators

the kernels were:
	2.4.20-pre9, 2.6.2 -- no comments
	2.6.2-rc3-mm1 -- that one didn`t include the Namesys VM patches
	2.6.2--mm1 -- that one _did_ include the Namesys VM patches

results:


		2.4.20-pre9	2.6.2		2.6.2-mm1	2.6.2-rc3-mm1

Load 1
  run1		6.27		9.14		9.42		10.52

Load 2
  run1		3.29		4.42		3.40		3.45
  run2		3.28		4.37		3.39		3.45

Load 3
  run1		4.42		8.39		18.26


short summary:

	2.4 is faster.


regards, Samium Gromoff



             reply	other threads:[~2004-02-09 15:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-09 14:57 Samium Gromoff [this message]
2004-02-09 15:46 ` [TEST] 2.4 vs 2.6.2 vs 2.6.2-mm1 vs 2.6.2-rc3-mm1 Samium Gromoff
2004-02-10 12:53 ` Nick Piggin
2004-02-10 13:33   ` Samium Gromoff

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=873c9kz4et.wl@canopus.ns.zel.ru \
    --to=deepfire@sic-elvis.zel.ru \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
    /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