All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Update: Industry db benchmark result
@ 2005-06-22 21:15 Chen, Kenneth W
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Chen, Kenneth W @ 2005-06-22 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

It's been awhile since last time I reported Linux kernel performance
for an industry standard transaction processing database benchmark. It's
time to report the data again to keep everyone informed.  Here is the
latest result that we measured (4P 1.6GHz ia64, 9M L3 cache, 64GB memory,
480 15K-RPM disks).

2.4.21-4.EL	baseline
2.6.9		- 6.00%
2.6.11	-13.00%
2.6.12-rc3	-13.54%
2.6.12-rc4	-13.05%
2.6.12-rc5	-12.86%
2.6.12-rc6	-12.66%

It's been hovering around -13%.  I will take a measurement of 2.6.12, though
I don't expect it to deviate too far from 2.6.12-rc6.  There are 718 patches
committed since 2.6.12 as of 6/22 14:09 PDT, so I'm going to take a snapshot
today or tomorrow and queue it up for benchmark measurement.  I will probably
take all the scheduler patches currently in -mm and give that a whirl as well.

- Ken


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* RE: Update: Industry db benchmark result
  2005-06-22 23:43 ` Andi Kleen
@ 2005-06-23  0:09   ` Chen, Kenneth W
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Chen, Kenneth W @ 2005-06-23  0:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ak; +Cc: linux-kernel

Andi Kleen wrote on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 4:44 PM
> "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> writes:
> > 
> > It's been hovering around -13%.  
> 
> Do you have an educated guess where the 13% loss is comming from? 

Process scheduler is the prime suspect. Earlier scheduler experiments
on top of 2.6.11 showed that it was about 10% regression.  Similar
experiments repeated on top of 2.6.12-rc4 indicated about a much
smaller 4%.  Other area are O_DIRECT (2%), and possibly scsi.

- Ken


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Update: Industry db benchmark result
       [not found] <200506222115.j5MLFtg10364@unix-os.sc.intel.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
@ 2005-06-22 23:43 ` Andi Kleen
  2005-06-23  0:09   ` Chen, Kenneth W
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andi Kleen @ 2005-06-22 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Chen, Kenneth W; +Cc: linux-kernel

"Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> writes:
> 
> It's been hovering around -13%.  

Do you have an educated guess where the 13% loss is comming from? 

-Andi

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-06-23  0:10 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-06-22 21:15 Update: Industry db benchmark result Chen, Kenneth W
     [not found] <200506222115.j5MLFtg10364@unix-os.sc.intel.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2005-06-22 23:43 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-23  0:09   ` Chen, Kenneth W

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.