Message-Id: <200503290307.j2T37Yg25879@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: "'Dave Jones'" <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: <axboe@suse.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [patch] optimization: defer bio_vec deallocation
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:07:30 -0800
Thread-Index: AcU0C1v698JzM+cfQ6WN/UEZAZZbrwAACswA
In-Reply-To: <20050329025932.GC435@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1153
Lines: 26

On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 06:38:23PM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> We have measured that the following patch give measurable performance gain
> for industry standard db benchmark.  Comments?

Dave Jones wrote on Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 PM
> If you can't publish results from that certain benchmark due its stupid
> restrictions, could you also try running an alternative benchmark that
> you can show results from ?
>
> These nebulous claims of 'measurable gains' could mean anything.
> I'm assuming you see a substantial increase in throughput, but
> how much is it worth in exchange for complicating the code?

Are you asking for micro-benchmark result?  I had a tough time last time
around when I presented micro-benchmark result on LKML.  I got kicked in
the butt for lack of evidence with performance data running real bench on
real hardware.

I guess either way, I'm bruised one way or the other.


-
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/