mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
To: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] ext2 v ext3 with contest
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:20:22 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200212242220.33049.conman@kolivas.net> (raw)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Here's a contest run comparing 2.5.52-mm2 on the same osdl hardware with the 
ext3 partitions mounted ext2 for comparison:

noload:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          39.2    181     0       0       1.08
2552mm2ext2 [5]         39.1    180     0       0       1.08
not significant

cacherun:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          36.5    194     0       0       1.01
2552mm2ext2 [5]         36.1    194     0       0       1.00
slight speedup here. 

process_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          46.5    152     8       41      1.28
2552mm2ext2 [5]         48.3    144     10      48      1.33
slight shift in the balance; no significant change

ctar_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          52.8    154     1       10      1.46
2552mm2ext2 [5]         47.2    163     1       7       1.30
speedup with better overall cpu usage with ext2

xtar_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          76.1    124     1       8       2.10
2552mm2ext2 [5]         95.6    101     1       5       2.64
interesting - a shift in the opposite direction here with ext2 much slower 
(large)

io_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          74.5    112     11      20      2.06
2552mm2ext2 [5]         77.4    118     11      13      2.14
same here

io_other:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          59.9    134     6       18      1.65
2552mm2ext2 [5]         52.8    137     6       11      1.46
slightly better with ext2

read_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          50.5    147     5       6       1.39
2552mm2ext2 [5]         49.3    149     5       6       1.36
slightly better ext2

list_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          43.7    167     0       9       1.21
2552mm2ext2 [5]         43.4    166     0       9       1.20

mem_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.52-mm2 [7]          66.0    141     39      3       1.82
2552mm2ext2 [5]         63.9    145     38      3       1.76
slightly better here

It seems the (possibly?) faster writing with ext2 causes slowdowns under heavy 
writing loads on the same disk, but improvements with the other loads.

Interesting results (not quite what I was expecting)

Enjoy the festive season

Cheers,
Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+CEL2F6dfvkL3i1gRAq/1AJ4wsVsERAUng6ALtmpnMflpb8co0gCfTYWB
JzOrStkqsDGV/fC+21N69f8=
=pUSo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

                 reply	other threads:[~2002-12-24 11:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200212242220.33049.conman@kolivas.net \
    --to=conman@kolivas.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rml@tech9.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome