* zcache preliminary benchmark results
@ 2012-03-21 23:30 ` Dan Magenheimer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Dan Magenheimer @ 2012-03-21 23:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-mm, James Bottomley
Cc: Nitin Gupta, Seth Jennings, Konrad Wilk, riel, Chris Mason,
Akshay Karle, Andrea Arcangeli
Last November, in an LKML thread I would rather forget*, James
Bottomley and others asked for some benchmarking to be done for
zcache (among other things). For various reasons, that benchmarking
is just now getting underway and more will be done, but it might be
useful to publish some interesting preliminary results now.
Summary: On a kernel compile "make -jN" workload, with different
values of N to test varying memory pressure, zcache
shows no performance loss when memory pressure is low,
and up to 31% performance improvement when memory pressure
is moderate to high. RAMster does even better.
(Note that RAM is intentionally constrained to 1GB to force
memory pressure for higher N in the workload.)
* thread summarized in LWN (http://lwn.net/Articles/465317/)
=========
Benchmark results and description:
(all results in seconds so smaller is better)
N= nozcache zcache faster by RAMster faster by
4 879 877 0% 887 -1%
8 858 856 0% 866 -1%
12 858 856 0% 875 -2%
16 1009 922 9% 949 6%
20 1316 1154 14% 1162 13%
24 2164 1714 26% 1788 21%
28 3293 2500 31% 2177 51%
32 4286 4282 0% 3599 19%
36 6516 6602 -1% 5394 22%
40 DNC 13755 8172 68% (over zcache)
DNC=did not complete: stopped after 5 hours = 18000
Workload:
kernel compile "make -jN" with varying N
measurements in elapsed seconds
boot kernel: 3.2 + frontswap/ramster commits
Oracle Linux 6 distro with ext4
fresh reboot for each test run
all tests run as root in multi-user mode
Hardware:
Dell Optiplex 790 = ~$500 (two used for RAMster)
Intel Core i5-2400 @ 3.10 GHz, 4coreX2thread, 6M cache
1GB RAM DDR3 1333Mhz (for RAMster, other server has 8GB)
One 7200rpm SATA 6.0Gb/s drive with 8MB cache
10GB swap partition
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* zcache preliminary benchmark results
@ 2012-03-21 23:30 ` Dan Magenheimer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Dan Magenheimer @ 2012-03-21 23:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-mm, James Bottomley
Cc: Nitin Gupta, Seth Jennings, Konrad Wilk, riel, Chris Mason,
Akshay Karle, Andrea Arcangeli
Last November, in an LKML thread I would rather forget*, James
Bottomley and others asked for some benchmarking to be done for
zcache (among other things). For various reasons, that benchmarking
is just now getting underway and more will be done, but it might be
useful to publish some interesting preliminary results now.
Summary: On a kernel compile "make -jN" workload, with different
values of N to test varying memory pressure, zcache
shows no performance loss when memory pressure is low,
and up to 31% performance improvement when memory pressure
is moderate to high. RAMster does even better.
(Note that RAM is intentionally constrained to 1GB to force
memory pressure for higher N in the workload.)
* thread summarized in LWN (http://lwn.net/Articles/465317/)
=========
Benchmark results and description:
(all results in seconds so smaller is better)
N= nozcache zcache faster by RAMster faster by
4 879 877 0% 887 -1%
8 858 856 0% 866 -1%
12 858 856 0% 875 -2%
16 1009 922 9% 949 6%
20 1316 1154 14% 1162 13%
24 2164 1714 26% 1788 21%
28 3293 2500 31% 2177 51%
32 4286 4282 0% 3599 19%
36 6516 6602 -1% 5394 22%
40 DNC 13755 8172 68% (over zcache)
DNC=did not complete: stopped after 5 hours = 18000
Workload:
kernel compile "make -jN" with varying N
measurements in elapsed seconds
boot kernel: 3.2 + frontswap/ramster commits
Oracle Linux 6 distro with ext4
fresh reboot for each test run
all tests run as root in multi-user mode
Hardware:
Dell Optiplex 790 = ~$500 (two used for RAMster)
Intel Core i5-2400 @ 3.10 GHz, 4coreX2thread, 6M cache
1GB RAM DDR3 1333Mhz (for RAMster, other server has 8GB)
One 7200rpm SATA 6.0Gb/s drive with 8MB cache
10GB swap partition
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: zcache preliminary benchmark results
2012-03-21 23:30 ` Dan Magenheimer
@ 2012-03-22 21:43 ` Seth Jennings
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Seth Jennings @ 2012-03-22 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Magenheimer
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-mm, James Bottomley, Nitin Gupta,
Konrad Wilk, riel, Chris Mason, Akshay Karle, Andrea Arcangeli
On 03/21/2012 06:30 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> Last November, in an LKML thread I would rather forget*, James
> Bottomley and others asked for some benchmarking to be done for
> zcache (among other things). For various reasons, that benchmarking
> is just now getting underway and more will be done, but it might be
> useful to publish some interesting preliminary results now.
I'd also like to post some zcache performance numbers that suggest
that zcache makes an even more impressive change to the amount
of total I/O when the system is under light to moderate memory
pressure.
Test machine:
Gentoo w/ kernel v3.3 + frontswap (cleancache disabled)
Quad-core i5-2500 @ 3.3GHz
1GB DDR3 1600MHz (limited with mem=1024m on boot)
Filesystem and swap on 2x80G RAID0
majflt are major page faults reported by "time"
pswpin/out is the delta of pswpin/out from /proc/vmstat before and after
the make -jN
Each run started with with swapoff/on and
echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
I/O
normal zcache change
N pswpin pswpout majflt I/O sum pswpin pswpout majflt I/O sum %I/O
8 0 133 1781 1914 0 0 1835 1835 4%
12 10 1140 1871 3021 0 5 1886 1891 37%
16 675 1978 2330 4983 21 63 3771 3855 23%
20 3420 6197 3421 13038 265 786 5218 6269 52%
24 28358 51884 8865 89107 3944 6227 36048 46219 48%
28 44132 62182 11931 118245 6094 11362 74323 91779 22%
32 94163 125086 22526 241775 22534 32803 179164 234501 3%
Runtime
N normal zcache %change
8 284 280 1%
12 283 281 1%
16 281 280 0%
20 289 310 -7%
24 322 311 3%
28 347 325 6%
32 437 378 14%
%CPU utilization (out of 400% on 4 cpus)
N normal zcache %change
8 245 245 0%
12 249 251 -1%
16 252 252 0%
20 247 255 -3%
24 221 230 -4%
28 204 219 -7%
32 162 187 -15%
Some of my runtime curve N vs %change doesn't match up with
Dan's probably due to differing swap device speeds and I think
my .config had less to build so the runtime magnitudes are less.
Runtime %change will be effected by the swap device speed. But
the I/O reductions are less related to swap device speed and, IMHO,
really show the value of zcache.
Environments with shared storage could particularly like this.
You could enable swap on your machines and frontswap+zcache
would give you an early warning system for memory pressure.
If frontswap starts picking up pages, the admin can get a
warning and zcache will mitigate the swap I/O impacting the
SAN while something is done to relieve the memory pressure.
--
Seth
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: zcache preliminary benchmark results
@ 2012-03-22 21:43 ` Seth Jennings
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Seth Jennings @ 2012-03-22 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Magenheimer
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-mm, James Bottomley, Nitin Gupta,
Konrad Wilk, riel, Chris Mason, Akshay Karle, Andrea Arcangeli
On 03/21/2012 06:30 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> Last November, in an LKML thread I would rather forget*, James
> Bottomley and others asked for some benchmarking to be done for
> zcache (among other things). For various reasons, that benchmarking
> is just now getting underway and more will be done, but it might be
> useful to publish some interesting preliminary results now.
I'd also like to post some zcache performance numbers that suggest
that zcache makes an even more impressive change to the amount
of total I/O when the system is under light to moderate memory
pressure.
Test machine:
Gentoo w/ kernel v3.3 + frontswap (cleancache disabled)
Quad-core i5-2500 @ 3.3GHz
1GB DDR3 1600MHz (limited with mem=1024m on boot)
Filesystem and swap on 2x80G RAID0
majflt are major page faults reported by "time"
pswpin/out is the delta of pswpin/out from /proc/vmstat before and after
the make -jN
Each run started with with swapoff/on and
echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
I/O
normal zcache change
N pswpin pswpout majflt I/O sum pswpin pswpout majflt I/O sum %I/O
8 0 133 1781 1914 0 0 1835 1835 4%
12 10 1140 1871 3021 0 5 1886 1891 37%
16 675 1978 2330 4983 21 63 3771 3855 23%
20 3420 6197 3421 13038 265 786 5218 6269 52%
24 28358 51884 8865 89107 3944 6227 36048 46219 48%
28 44132 62182 11931 118245 6094 11362 74323 91779 22%
32 94163 125086 22526 241775 22534 32803 179164 234501 3%
Runtime
N normal zcache %change
8 284 280 1%
12 283 281 1%
16 281 280 0%
20 289 310 -7%
24 322 311 3%
28 347 325 6%
32 437 378 14%
%CPU utilization (out of 400% on 4 cpus)
N normal zcache %change
8 245 245 0%
12 249 251 -1%
16 252 252 0%
20 247 255 -3%
24 221 230 -4%
28 204 219 -7%
32 162 187 -15%
Some of my runtime curve N vs %change doesn't match up with
Dan's probably due to differing swap device speeds and I think
my .config had less to build so the runtime magnitudes are less.
Runtime %change will be effected by the swap device speed. But
the I/O reductions are less related to swap device speed and, IMHO,
really show the value of zcache.
Environments with shared storage could particularly like this.
You could enable swap on your machines and frontswap+zcache
would give you an early warning system for memory pressure.
If frontswap starts picking up pages, the admin can get a
warning and zcache will mitigate the swap I/O impacting the
SAN while something is done to relieve the memory pressure.
--
Seth
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-03-22 21:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-03-21 23:30 zcache preliminary benchmark results Dan Magenheimer
2012-03-21 23:30 ` Dan Magenheimer
2012-03-22 21:43 ` Seth Jennings
2012-03-22 21:43 ` Seth Jennings
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.