From: Gordan Bobic <gordan@bobich.net>
To: Thanos Makatos <thanos.makatos@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Murray <murrayie@yahoo.co.uk>,
"lars.kurth@xen.org" <lars.kurth@xen.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: Xen 4.2.2 / KVM / VirtualBox benchmark on Haswell
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:26:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d71b5055c6daaa66abb58b975012f2f3@mail.shatteredsilicon.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2368A3FCF9F7214298E53C823B0A48EC034B8A@LONPEX01CL02.citrite.net>
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:21:52 +0000, Thanos Makatos
<thanos.makatos@citrix.com> wrote:
>> > IMO it's a bad thing because it's far from a representative
>> benchmark,
>> > which can lead to wrong conclusions when evaluation I/O
>> performance.
>>
>> Ancient doesn't mean non-representative. A good file-system
>> benchmark
>
> In this particular case it is: PostMark is a single-threaded
> application that performs read and write operations on a fixed set of
> files, at an unrealistically low directory depth; modern I/O
> workloads
> exhibit much more complicated behaviour than this.
Unless you are running a mail server. Granted, running multiple
postmarks in parallel might be a better test on today's many-core
servers, but it'd likely make no little or no difference on a
disk I/O bound test.
Gordan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-09 16:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-09 15:27 Xen 4.2.2 / KVM / VirtualBox benchmark on Haswell Lars Kurth
2013-07-09 15:40 ` Thanos Makatos
2013-07-09 15:53 ` Ian Murray
2013-07-09 15:56 ` Thanos Makatos
2013-07-09 16:14 ` Gordan Bobic
2013-07-09 16:21 ` Thanos Makatos
2013-07-09 16:26 ` Gordan Bobic [this message]
2013-07-09 15:54 ` Gordan Bobic
2013-07-11 10:53 ` Dario Faggioli
2013-07-11 16:23 ` George Dunlap
2013-07-11 16:27 ` Dario Faggioli
2013-07-11 17:49 ` Gordan Bobic
2013-07-09 16:52 ` Alex 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=d71b5055c6daaa66abb58b975012f2f3@mail.shatteredsilicon.net \
--to=gordan@bobich.net \
--cc=lars.kurth@xen.org \
--cc=murrayie@yahoo.co.uk \
--cc=thanos.makatos@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).