Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.{18,19{-ck9},20rc1{-aa1}} with contest
Andrea Arcangeli (andrea@suse.de)
Sun, 10 Nov 2002 17:23:22 +0100
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 11:09:42AM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 10 2002, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > >The default is 2048. How long does the io_load test take, or rather how
> > >many tests are appropriate to do? To get a good picture of how it looks
> > >you should probably try: 0, 8, 16, 64, 128, 512. Once you get some of
> > >these results, it will be easier to determine which area(s) would be
> > >most interesting to further explore.
> >
> > The io_load test takes as long as the time in seconds shown on the table. At
> > least 3 tests are appropriate to get a reasonable average [runs is in square
> > parentheses]. Therefore it takes about half an hour per run. Luckily I had
> > the benefit of a night to set up a whole lot of runs:
> >
> > io_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2420rc1r0 [3] 489.3 15 36 10 6.85
> > 2420rc1r8 [3] 485.5 15 35 10 6.80
> > 2420rc1r16 [3] 570.4 12 43 10 7.99
> > 2420rc1r32 [3] 570.1 12 42 10 7.98
> > 2420rc1r64 [3] 575.0 12 43 10 8.05
> > 2420rc1r128 [3] 611.4 11 46 10 8.56
> > 2420rc1r256 [3] 646.2 11 49 10 9.05
> > 2420rc1r512 [3] 603.7 12 45 10 8.46
> > 2420rc1r1024 [3] 693.9 10 53 10 9.72
> > 2.4.20-rc1 [2] 1142.2 6 90 10 16.00
> >
> > Test hardware is 1133Mhz P3 laptop with 5400rpm ATA100 drive. I don't doubt
> > the response curve would be different for other hardware.
>
> That looks pretty good, the behaviour in 2.4.20-rc1 is no sanely tunable
> unlike before. Could you retest the whole contest suite with 512 as the
> default value? It looks like a good default for 2.4.20.
agreed, btw, a 2048 before the fixes would mean much less than now.
Andrea
-
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/