Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261642AbVDBBA4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:00:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262808AbVDBBA4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:00:56 -0500 Received: from fmr22.intel.com ([143.183.121.14]:30151 "EHLO scsfmr002.sc.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261642AbVDBBAw (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:00:52 -0500 Message-Id: <200504020100.j3210fg04870@unix-os.sc.intel.com> From: "Chen, Kenneth W" To: "'Ingo Molnar'" Cc: "'Linus Torvalds'" , "'Nick Piggin'" , "'Andrew Morton'" , Subject: RE: Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 17:00:41 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: AcU2dqAYWWaQP3D/RMi9o9IYROSavAAACMnQACn1B+A= In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 895 Lines: 22 Ingo Molnar wrote on Thursday, March 31, 2005 8:52 PM > the current defaults for cache_hot_time are 10 msec for NUMA domains, > and 2.5 msec for SMP domains. Clearly too low for CPUs with 9MB cache. > Are you increasing cache_hot_time in your experiment? If that solves > most of the problem that would be an easy thing to fix for 2.6.12. Chen, Kenneth W wrote on Thursday, March 31, 2005 9:15 PM > Yes, we are increasing the number in our experiments. It's in the queue > and I should have a result soon. Hot of the press: bumping up cache_hot_time to 10ms on our db setup brings 2.6.11 performance on par with 2.6.9. Theory confirmed. - Ken - 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/