Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 20:35:09 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: rwhron@earthlink.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] AIM7 fserver regressed in 2.5.70*
Message-Id: <20030604203509.2121a747.akpm@digeo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030605024940.GA14406@rushmore>
References: <20030605024940.GA14406@rushmore>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1284
Lines: 38

rwhron@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> Summary:
>  AIM7 fileserver workload behaviour changed with 2.5.70.
>  At low task counts (load average), 2.5.70* takes 40% 
>  longer than 2.5.69.  As task count increases, regression
>  disappears.
> 
>  Hardware has (4) 700 mhz P3 Xeons.
>  3.75 GB RAM
>  RAID 0 LUN (hardware raid)
> 
>  Background:
>  AIM7 fserver is the only regressed workload.  In general, 
>  2.5.70* has better numbers than 2.5.69* for a variety of
>  benchmarks.
> 
>  Part of the improvement in 2.5.70 I/O benchmarks is
>  from a fiber channel configuration change.  2.5.70* has
>  two online fiber channels.  Earlier kernels had only one
>  fiber channel online.  
> 
>  Tiobench and bonnie++ show about 10% improvement.  
>  LMbench microbenchmarks are generally improving or stable
>  in recent 2.5.x.  

I'd assume that the improvements would be wholly due to the
IO controller changes?  Are you saying that there is something
else involved?

If you could share the jobfile and means-to-reproduce I can
take a look, thanks.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/