Hi,
I ran a few more benchmarks on 2.4.0 final with 3.6.24. The results were a
little susprising (all on the same box, just after boot, no X):
MB/s user system cpu time
3.6.24 7.1 54.0 177,6 25% 14:57.5
3.6.24 14.5 53.2 152.4 47% 7:15.7
3.6.24 5.6 55.6 191.0 22% 18:36.4
reiserfs can do well, but notice how the system cpu seconds varies...
I am not seeing such wild differences in ext2 runs, impling that they
are due to something in reiserfs?
Ed Tomlinson
On Thursday 04 January 2001 20:41, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been doing some dbench runs with the original and latest (Jan 4
> 22:xx) prerelease.diff kernels. Looks like both the latest kernels and the
> reiserfs patch both are costing some performance.
>
> prerelease
> MB/s user system cpu time
> ext2 14.6 50.5s 76.4s 29% 7:14.9m
> ext2 12.6 50.9s 76.7s 25% 8:23.6m
>
> reiser 14.5 53.8s 149.2s 46% 7:16.1m
> reiser 10.7 54.1s 154.5s 35% 9:49.9m
>
> prerelease (2.4.0 jan 4 22:xx)
> MB/s user system cpu time
> ext2 10.5 52.8s 81.5s 22% 10:02.3m
>
> reiser 5.8 54.6s 198.5s 23% 18:12.5m
> reiser 6.4 55.1s 188.7s 24% 16.19.3m
>
> Using the notail reiserfs mount option improves the reiserfs numbers 10-20%
> with both kernels.
>
> All benchmarks run on a K6-III 400 with 128M just after boot with no X
> running.
>
> Comments?
> Ed Tomlinson
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
