Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761469AbXJDSkm (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:40:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759441AbXJDSke (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:40:34 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([143.182.124.22]:28459 "EHLO azsmga101.ch.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756530AbXJDSkc (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:40:32 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,231,1188802800"; d="scan'208";a="292760828" Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:28:25 -0700 To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Nick Piggin , Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Chinner , Jens Axboe , suresh.b.siddha@intel.com Subject: Re: SLUB performance regression vs SLAB Message-ID: <20071004192824.GA9852@linux.intel.com> References: <20070919033605.785839297@sgi.com> <200709280742.38262.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <200709281514.48293.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20071004161621.GO12049@parisc-linux.org> <20071004183224.GA8641@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: willy@linux.intel.com (Matthew Wilcox) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1644 Lines: 37 On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:49:52AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > I was not aware of that. Would it be possible for you to summarize all the > test data that you have right now about SLUB vs. SLAB with the patches > listed? Exactly what kernel version and what version of the per cpu > patches were tested? We have three runs, all with 2.6.23-rc3 plus the patches that Suresh applied from 20070922. The first run is with slab. The second run is with SLUB and the third run is SLUB plus the tuning parameters you recommended. I have a spreadsheet with Vtune data in it that was collected during each of these test runs, so we can see which functions are the hottest. I can grab that data and send it to you, if that's interesting. > Was the page allocator pass through patchset > separately applied as I requested? I don't believe so. Suresh? I think for future tests, it would be easiest if you send me a git reference. That way we will all know precisely what is being tested. > Finally: Is there some way that I can reproduce the tests on my machines? As usual for these kinds of setups ... take a two-CPU machine, 64GB of memory, half a dozen fibre channel adapters, about 3000 discs, a commercial database, a team of experts for three months worth of tuning ... I don't know if anyone's tried to replicate a benchmark like this using Postgres. Would be nice if they have ... - 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/