Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 16:13:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 16:13:15 -0400 Received: from [213.23.20.221] ([213.23.20.221]:2735 "EHLO starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 16:13:14 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Nathan Straz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.2 and 2.4 performance issues Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 22:13:09 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] References: <1024678560.879.27.camel@lpinto> <20020621171058.GA27100@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20020621171058.GA27100@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1229 Lines: 25 On Friday 21 June 2002 19:10, Nathan Straz wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 05:55:55PM +0100, Luis Pedro de Moura Ribeiro Pinto wrote: > > I was asked (i'm a company freshman) to perform some tests between > > kernel versions 2.2 and 2.4, and after awhile searching i found a good > > set of benchmarking tools (aim7) from Caldera linux. > > Benchmarks are evil. Sure they are useful at times, but for the most > part they get misused. There's no sense denying evidence that 2.2 outperforms 2.4 under certain workloads. Instead we should just be more determined to root out all those problems and deal with them. There is no inherent design reason why 2.4 should be slower than 2.2 in any area at all, however, some practical issues, such as IO scheduling still remain and are being actively worked on. Expect backports from 2.5 later in the 2.4 series. For now, the one thing we must not do is risk instability in 2.4, now that most users have switched over to it. -- Daniel - 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/