Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:24:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:24:20 -0400 Received: from atlrel6.hp.com ([192.151.27.8]:64008 "HELO atlrel6.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:24:03 -0400 Message-ID: From: "DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2)" To: "Kernel Mailing List (E-mail)" Cc: "Jens Axboe (E-mail)" Subject: performance of 2.4.13pre4 with Jens blockhighmem Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:22:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Here is some more performance data. I had some problems with the megaraid portion of the patch and removed that part of it since most of the storage was connected via the qlogicfc card. What I measured was a maximum throughput of 125% that of the 2.4.13pre4 without the patch. The run was also much more stable. (No dropped packets because of response times.) The formula used is: Max throughput of the 2.4.13pre4 with patch --------------------------------------------------------------- * 100 Max throughput of the' 2.4.13pre4 w/o patch The problem that I see is that 2.4.13preX were all really slow. I'm seeing less than 50% of the throughput that was seen in 2.4.5pre1 and the response times increased by 50% in the 2.4.13pre2 time frame. Where we were getting 1 ms response times, we now see 1.5 to 2. This multiplicative factor grows as the test becomes more aggressive. The benchmark is SPEC SFS NFS benchmark testing. The filesystem is reiserfs. I hope this information helps. Cary - 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/