(1/2) reverse mapping VM for 2.5.23 (rmap-13b)
Quoted 2 lines
Maybe Randy Hron (added to Cc) can find some spare time to benchmark these sometime before the summit too[1].
dbench isn't scaling as well with the -rmap13b patch. With 128 processes, dbench throughput is less than 1/3 of mainline.
dbench ext2 32 processes Average High Low
2.5.24 28.24 28.84 27.30 mb/sec 2.5.24-rmap13b 21.64 23.50 19.71
dbench ext2 128 processes Average High Low
2.5.24 19.32 21.05 18.05
2.5.24-rmap13b 5.34 5.38 5.30
tiobench:
Sequential reads, rmap had about 10% more throughput and lower max latency.
For random reads, throughput was lower and max latency was higher with rmap.
Lmbench:
Most metrics look better with rmap. Exceptions are fork/exec latency and mmap latency. mmap latency was 18% higher with rmap.
Autoconf build (fork test) was about 5% faster without rmap.
Details at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/latest.html
Signature · 1 line
Randy Hron
Quoted 1 line · On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 [email protected] wrote:
dbench isn't scaling as well with the -rmap13b patch.
That probably means the system is fairer. Dbench "performance" is at its best when the system is less fair.
I won't lecture you on why dbench isn't a good benchmark since you must have heard that 100 times now ;)
regards,
Rik
Signature · 3 lines
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/