dbench results are not perfectly repeatable. I agree that dbench
results that vary by 20% or so may not be meaningful. I think
dbench is of some value though. In some cases the difference
between kernels is 200% or more.
Below are results from a couple of aa releases, and a few rmap
releases. Some of the tests were ran twice. You can see that
there is some variation between "identical" runs. You can see
that aa kernels do extremely well with large numbers of processes,
and as the number of processes increases from 64 -> 128 -> 192,
the throughput drops in a predictable way.
rmap, when compared with most other kernels does well with 64 processes.
At 192, rmap doesn't do as well. That may be useful information for the
people developing rmap.
dbench 64 processes
2.4.18pre4aa1 ************************************************** 25.2 MB/sec
2.4.18pre2aa2 ******************************************** 22.2 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11a **************************** 14.2 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11a *************************** 13.9 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap12a *************************** 13.7 MB/sec
2.4.18pre3rmap11b ********************** 11.4 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11c ********************* 10.8 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11c ********************* 10.6 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11b ******************* 9.7 MB/sec
dbench 128 processes
2.4.18pre4aa1 ******************************** 16.4 MB/sec
2.4.18pre2aa2 ******************************** 16.3 MB/sec
2.4.18pre2aa2 ***************************** 14.9 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11a ************ 6.1 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11a ************ 6.1 MB/sec
2.4.18pre3rmap11b ********** 5.1 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11b ********* 5.0 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap12a ********* 4.5 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11c ******** 4.2 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11c ******** 4.2 MB/sec
dbench 192 processes
2.4.18pre2aa2 ***************** 8.8 MB/sec
2.4.18pre4aa1 **************** 8.2 MB/sec
2.4.18pre2aa2 *************** 7.7 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11a ******** 4.4 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11a ******** 4.3 MB/sec
2.4.18pre3rmap11b ******* 3.8 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11b ******* 3.8 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap12a ****** 3.1 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11c ***** 3.0 MB/sec
2.4.17rmap11c ***** 2.9 MB/sec
On the other hand, rmap does very well with sequential reads
on tiobench, which is running a lot fewer processes than dbench.
Read, Write, and Seeks are MB/sec
Num Seq Read Rand Read Seq Write Rand Write
Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
--- ------------- ----------- ------------- -----------
2.4.17rmap12a 1 22.85 32.2% 1.15 2.2% 13.10 83.5% 0.71 1.6%
2.4.18pre2aa2 1 11.96 23.1% 2.24 3.2% 12.90 76.8% 0.71 1.6%
2.4.18pre4aa1 1 11.23 21.3% 3.12 4.8% 11.92 66.1% 0.66 1.3%
2.4.17rmap12a 2 22.07 32.1% 1.20 2.2% 12.84 80.4% 0.71 1.6%
2.4.18pre2aa2 2 11.09 22.0% 2.57 3.2% 13.10 76.3% 0.70 1.6%
2.4.18pre4aa1 2 10.68 20.9% 3.39 4.4% 12.14 67.9% 0.67 1.3%
2.4.17rmap12a 4 21.75 32.0% 1.20 2.2% 12.69 78.5% 0.71 1.6%
2.4.18pre2aa2 4 10.52 21.1% 2.82 3.6% 12.84 73.9% 0.69 1.5%
2.4.18pre4aa1 4 10.48 20.4% 3.56 4.2% 12.28 69.0% 0.67 1.4%
2.4.17rmap12a 8 21.34 31.8% 1.23 2.3% 12.57 77.3% 0.71 1.7%
2.4.18pre2aa2 8 10.24 19.5% 3.01 4.0% 12.94 74.1% 0.70 1.6%
2.4.18pre4aa1 8 10.08 18.9% 3.63 4.5% 12.24 68.8% 0.67 1.4%
I added bonnie++ to the list of tests a day or so ago.
I'll begin putting those results up in the near future.
-- Randy Hron- 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/