From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751097Ab2KOV2C (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:28:02 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33771 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750765Ab2KOV2B (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:28:01 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 21:27:54 +0000 From: Mel Gorman To: Rik van Riel Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Paul Turner , Lee Schermerhorn , Christoph Lameter , Andrew Morton , Andrea Arcangeli , Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , Larry Woodman Subject: Re: Benchmark results: "Enhanced NUMA scheduling with adaptive affinity" Message-ID: <20121115212754.GW8218@suse.de> References: <20121112160451.189715188@chello.nl> <20121112184833.GA17503@gmail.com> <20121115100805.GS8218@suse.de> <50A53A00.5060904@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50A53A00.5060904@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:52:48PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 11/15/2012 05:08 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: > >On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 07:48:33PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >>Here are some preliminary performance figures, comparing the > >>vanilla kernel against the CONFIG_SCHED_NUMA=y kernel. > >> > >>Java SPEC benchmark, running on a 4 node, 64 GB, 32-way server > >>system (higher numbers are better): > > > >Ok, I used a 4-node, 64G, 48-way server system. We have different CPUs > >but the same number of nodes. In case it makes a difference each of my > >machines nodes are the same size. > > Mel, do you have info on exactly what model system you > were running these tests on? > Dell PowerEdge R810 CPU Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7- 4807 @ 1.87GHz RAM 64G Single disk 4 JVMs, one per node SpecJBB configured to run in multi JVM configuration No special binding JVM switches -Xmx12882m All run through an unreleased version of MMTests. I'll make a release of mmtests either tomorrow or Monday when I get the chance. > Obviously your results are very different from the ones > that Ingo saw. It would be most helpful if we could find > a similar system in one of the Red Hat labs, so Ingo can > play around with it and see what's going on :) > Also compare how the benchmark is actually configured and which figures he's reporting. I'm posting up the throughput for each warehouse and the peak throughput. It is possible Ingo's figures are based on other patches in the tip tree that have not been identified. If that's the case it's interesting in itself. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs