Message-ID: <4A2ABB62.6080705@cohaesio.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:54:26 +0200
From: "Anders K. Pedersen" <akp@cohaesio.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090321 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave McCracken <dcm@mccr.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt_ops on native
 kernels
References: <4A0B62F7.5030802@goop.org> <200906041554.37102.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <alpine.LFD.2.01.0906040736350.4880@localhost.localdomain> <200906041652.55298.dcm@mccr.org>
In-Reply-To: <200906041652.55298.dcm@mccr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 821
Lines: 19

Dave McCracken wrote:
> What I see as the message of his benchmark is if you care about performance 
> you should be customizing your kernel anyway.  Distro kernels are slow.  An 
> option that makes the distro kernel a bit slower is no big deal since anyone 
> who wants speed should already be rebuilding their kernel.

And Oracle of course supports customers doing that?

Not in my experience, and the same goes for most other commercial
enterprise software on Linux as well, so customers have to stick to
distro kernels, if they want support.

Regards,
Anders K. Pedersen
--
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/