From: Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Quick update on latest Linux kernel performance
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 07:12:48 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050920141248.55369.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200509132132.j8DLWJg04553@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
--- "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
wrote:
> New performance result are posted on
> http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net
> with latest data collected on kernel
> 2.6.13-git9.
>
> Kernel-build bench are fairly stable over the
> last 14 kernel versions
> or so. It was consistently 3-5% better on
> x86_64 over baseline 2.6.9
> kernel. It showed a lot smaller gain on ia64
> though.
>
> Java business benchmark showed very little
> change in performance on all
> kernel versions.
>
> Volanomark took some heavy performance hit
> during 2.6.12-rc* period, but
> come back in 2.6.13 on x86_64 configuration.
> Though latest 2.6.13-git9
> showed a little bit perf. regression.
>
> Netperf is showing wildly result, especially
> the 1-byte request/response
> component. Overall, UDP portion Of the netperf
> are showing nice improvement
> over baseline 2.6.9 kernel.
>
> Industry standard transaction processing
> database workload still suffering
> 13% performance regression with 2.6.13. (data
> will be posted in a separate mail)
>
> Take a look at the performance data. Comments
> and suggestions are always
> welcome and please post them to LKML.
Does it still drop packets when only running at
15% utilization?
Did you run data streams through the box while
doing these tests? There's a difference between
gaining performance in a benchmark and just
shifting performance from one activity to
another. If the latter is the case, then there's
been no progress at all. I keep seeing all these
great benchmark results, and linux keeps dropping
more and more packets as the versions increase.
Its become practically unusable as a specialized
networking appliance.
Danial
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-20 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-13 21:32 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-09-14 6:17 ` Chris White
2005-09-14 16:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-09-15 7:15 ` Helge Hafting
2005-09-20 14:12 ` Danial Thom [this message]
2005-09-15 17:39 Felix Oxley
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=20050920141248.55369.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
--to=danial_thom@yahoo.com \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®