From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261961AbUB2Bn5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:43:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261963AbUB2Bn4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:43:56 -0500 Received: from ppp-217-133-42-200.cust-adsl.tiscali.it ([217.133.42.200]:61914 "EHLO dualathlon.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261961AbUB2Bnz (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:43:55 -0500 Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 02:43:57 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Rik van Riel Cc: "Martin J. Bligh" , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.23aa2 (bugfixes and important VM improvements for the high end) Message-ID: <20040229014357.GW8834@dualathlon.random> References: <20040228072926.GR8834@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 13D9 8355 295F 4823 7C49 C012 DFA1 686E 68B9 CB43 X-PGP-Key: 1024R/CB4660B9 CC A0 71 81 F4 A0 63 AC C0 4B 81 1D 8C 15 C8 E5 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 09:55:14AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > The different setups should definately be benchmarked. I know > we expected the 4:4 kernel to be slower at everything, but the > folks at Oracle actually ran into a few situations where the 4:4 > kernel was _faster_ than a 3:1 kernel. > > Definately not what we expected, but a nice surprise nontheless. this is the first time I hear something like this. Maybe you mean the 4:4 was actually using more ram for the SGA? Just curious.