Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 19:15:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 19:15:44 -0500 Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.22]:23731 "EHLO hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 19:15:36 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 19:19:27 -0500 To: Daniel Phillips Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.18pre4aa1 Message-ID: <20020124191927.A809@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <20020124002342.A630@earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from phillips@bonn-fries.net on Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 07:27:43AM +0100 From: rwhron@earthlink.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/k6-2-475.html > > Even when mostly uncached, dbench still produces flaky results. dbench results are not perfectly repeatable. I agree that dbench results that vary by 20% or so may not be meaningful. I think dbench is of some value though. In some cases the difference between kernels is 200% or more. Below are results from a couple of aa releases, and a few rmap releases. Some of the tests were ran twice. You can see that there is some variation between "identical" runs. You can see that aa kernels do extremely well with large numbers of processes, and as the number of processes increases from 64 -> 128 -> 192, the throughput drops in a predictable way. rmap, when compared with most other kernels does well with 64 processes. At 192, rmap doesn't do as well. That may be useful information for the people developing rmap. dbench 64 processes 2.4.18pre4aa1 ************************************************** 25.2 MB/sec 2.4.18pre2aa2 ******************************************** 22.2 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11a **************************** 14.2 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11a *************************** 13.9 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap12a *************************** 13.7 MB/sec 2.4.18pre3rmap11b ********************** 11.4 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11c ********************* 10.8 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11c ********************* 10.6 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11b ******************* 9.7 MB/sec dbench 128 processes 2.4.18pre4aa1 ******************************** 16.4 MB/sec 2.4.18pre2aa2 ******************************** 16.3 MB/sec 2.4.18pre2aa2 ***************************** 14.9 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11a ************ 6.1 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11a ************ 6.1 MB/sec 2.4.18pre3rmap11b ********** 5.1 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11b ********* 5.0 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap12a ********* 4.5 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11c ******** 4.2 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11c ******** 4.2 MB/sec dbench 192 processes 2.4.18pre2aa2 ***************** 8.8 MB/sec 2.4.18pre4aa1 **************** 8.2 MB/sec 2.4.18pre2aa2 *************** 7.7 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11a ******** 4.4 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11a ******** 4.3 MB/sec 2.4.18pre3rmap11b ******* 3.8 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11b ******* 3.8 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap12a ****** 3.1 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11c ***** 3.0 MB/sec 2.4.17rmap11c ***** 2.9 MB/sec On the other hand, rmap does very well with sequential reads on tiobench, which is running a lot fewer processes than dbench. Read, Write, and Seeks are MB/sec Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand Write Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) --- ------------- ----------- ------------- ----------- 2.4.17rmap12a 1 22.85 32.2% 1.15 2.2% 13.10 83.5% 0.71 1.6% 2.4.18pre2aa2 1 11.96 23.1% 2.24 3.2% 12.90 76.8% 0.71 1.6% 2.4.18pre4aa1 1 11.23 21.3% 3.12 4.8% 11.92 66.1% 0.66 1.3% 2.4.17rmap12a 2 22.07 32.1% 1.20 2.2% 12.84 80.4% 0.71 1.6% 2.4.18pre2aa2 2 11.09 22.0% 2.57 3.2% 13.10 76.3% 0.70 1.6% 2.4.18pre4aa1 2 10.68 20.9% 3.39 4.4% 12.14 67.9% 0.67 1.3% 2.4.17rmap12a 4 21.75 32.0% 1.20 2.2% 12.69 78.5% 0.71 1.6% 2.4.18pre2aa2 4 10.52 21.1% 2.82 3.6% 12.84 73.9% 0.69 1.5% 2.4.18pre4aa1 4 10.48 20.4% 3.56 4.2% 12.28 69.0% 0.67 1.4% 2.4.17rmap12a 8 21.34 31.8% 1.23 2.3% 12.57 77.3% 0.71 1.7% 2.4.18pre2aa2 8 10.24 19.5% 3.01 4.0% 12.94 74.1% 0.70 1.6% 2.4.18pre4aa1 8 10.08 18.9% 3.63 4.5% 12.24 68.8% 0.67 1.4% I added bonnie++ to the list of tests a day or so ago. I'll begin putting those results up in the near future. -- Randy Hron - 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/