Re: Disk performance in phoronix
T. Howell-Cintron wrote: T. Howell-Cintron wrote: It's also troubling that the disk I/O, computational performance, and more seem to be slower as new releases are made available. They benchmarked F7 through F10 and the different was sometimes dramatic. We call that progress? I'm sorry, the benchmark I was referring to can be found here: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=fedora_test_2008num=1 -- Tom If I read correctly that bechmark it's nothing to look forward. They didn't even run the tests multiple times (or if they did they didn't tell it) and they admid using version of F10 with debugging information on so it could affect the results. Also we don't know what settings have been changed from the stock distribution and cannot redo the tests so those test results are as good as digital toiletpaper. -vpk -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Disk performance in phoronix
On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 21:24 -0500, T. Howell-Cintron wrote: T. Howell-Cintron wrote: I'm stunned by the results and though I'm no guru I suspect SELinux might have something to do with it. What can be done to achieve better - hopefully comparable - performance with Fedora? It's also troubling that the disk I/O, computational performance, and more seem to be slower as new releases are made available. They benchmarked F7 through F10 and the different was sometimes dramatic. We call that progress? -- Tom As far as I understand, the main problem with Phoronix's test suite is that it doesn't use native packages. Sure, Phoronix' copy of bzip2/apache/etc might be slower on Fedora 11 compared to Fedora 8, but it more-or-less says -zero- about the actual performance difference between the -native- versions of bzip2/apache/etc on Fedora 8 and Fedora 11. I'm not saying that Phoronix is wrong - I am saying that his testing methodology is invalid. - Gilboa -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Disk performance in phoronix
Hi, I just read the extremely poor result of Fedora in the Phoronix test suite. In particular, the disk performance results are very bad. (See http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=distro_four_waynum=4 ) Are there any explanations? Thanks, Jochen -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Disk-performance-in-phoronix-tp3330329p3330329.html Sent from the fedora mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Disk performance in phoronix
On 07/27/2009 01:39 AM, jochen wrote: Hi, I just read the extremely poor result of Fedora in the Phoronix test suite. In particular, the disk performance results are very bad. (See http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=distro_four_waynum=4 ) Are there any explanations? They are using development snapshots of these distributions and the performance of those will vary on a daily basis with snapshots of development kernels, the specific debugging options enabled etc. Hard to say without more specific details (such as kernel versions) and whether it was reproducible etc. Rahul -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Disk performance in phoronix
jochen wrote: Hi, I just read the extremely poor result of Fedora in the Phoronix test suite. In particular, the disk performance results are very bad. (See http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=distro_four_waynum=4 ) Are there any explanations? I'm stunned by the results and though I'm no guru I suspect SELinux might have something to do with it. What can be done to achieve better - hopefully comparable - performance with Fedora? -- Tom -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Disk performance in phoronix
T. Howell-Cintron wrote: I'm stunned by the results and though I'm no guru I suspect SELinux might have something to do with it. What can be done to achieve better - hopefully comparable - performance with Fedora? It's also troubling that the disk I/O, computational performance, and more seem to be slower as new releases are made available. They benchmarked F7 through F10 and the different was sometimes dramatic. We call that progress? -- Tom -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Disk performance in phoronix
T. Howell-Cintron wrote: It's also troubling that the disk I/O, computational performance, and more seem to be slower as new releases are made available. They benchmarked F7 through F10 and the different was sometimes dramatic. We call that progress? I'm sorry, the benchmark I was referring to can be found here: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=articleitem=fedora_test_2008num=1 -- Tom -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
