From: "K P" <kplkml@gmail.com>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>
Cc: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: JVM performance on Linux (vs. Solaris/Windows)
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:10:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <62a080740604131410p3f22f7afncd3096c49be41cf4@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <443EB70B.3080908@mbligh.org>
Besides, Specjbb_2005 doesn't do any IO or networking, and these should
not be factors in the result.
So although it's a simplistic benchmark where OS tuning may not provide as
much benefit as JVM tuning, it still doesn't explain why Solaris is ~15% higher
than Linux on the same hardware and JVM (I'm guessing that the tester did
not spend as much time tuning Linux as they did Solaris, hence the question).
-kp
On 4/13/06, Martin J. Bligh <mbligh@mbligh.org> wrote:
>
> > Note they ran the benchmark on an Opteron 285 instead of a Xeon with
> > 16 GB of memory. Opteron peformance currently **SUCKS** with 2.6
> > series kernels under any kind of heavy I/O due to their cloning of the
> > ancient 82489DX architecture for I/O interrupt access and
> > performance. Looks like the test was stakced against Linux from the
> > start. Should have used a Xeon system.
> > AMD needs to get their crappy I/O performance up to snuff. Looking at
> > the test parameteres leads me to believe there was a lot of swapping
> > on a system with already poor I/O performance.
> >
>
> Looks to me like it was the same h/w for Linux as Solaris, so I don't
> think that's much of an excuse ;-)
>
> M.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-13 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-13 14:53 K P
2006-04-13 15:56 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-04-13 18:21 ` Jan Knutar
2006-04-13 18:54 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-04-13 20:23 ` David S. Miller
2006-04-13 21:01 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2006-04-13 19:22 ` David Lang
2006-04-13 23:50 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2006-04-13 20:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-04-13 21:10 ` K P [this message]
2006-04-13 23:04 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-04-14 22:36 ` Bogus Benchmark (was Re: JVM performance on Linux (vs. Solaris/Windows)) Linda Walsh
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=62a080740604131410p3f22f7afncd3096c49be41cf4@mail.gmail.com \
--to=kplkml@gmail.com \
--cc=jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@mbligh.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®