Re: Performance Results for Ingo's O(1)-scheduler

From: Adam Keys (akeys@post.cis.smu.edu)
Date: Mon Jan 21 2002 - 22:55:32 EST

On January 21, 2002 06:03, Partha Narayanan wrote:
> Here are some results from running VolanoMark on different
> versions of O(1)-scheduler based on 2.4.17.
>
> VolanoMark 2.1.2 Loopback test,
> 8-way 700MHZ Pentium III,
> 1GB Kernel,
> IBM JVM 1.3. (build cx 130 -20010626)
> Throughput in msg/sec
>
>
> KERNEL UP 4-way 8-way
> ========= ====== ====== ======
>
> 2.4.17 11005 15894 11595
>
> 2.4.17 + D2 patch 10606 23300 29726
>
> 2.4.17 + G1 patch 10415 23038 31098
>
> 2.4.17 + H6 patch 10914 22270 32300
>
> 2.4.17 + H7 patch 11018 23427 31674
>
> 2.4.17 + J2 patch 13015 23071 33259

I'm curious about the performance of the 4-way and 8-way systems. I know
nothing about this benchmark. IIRC correctly it simulates chat clients
connecting to a server and talking to each other. Is it a CPU, memory, or
disk bound benchmark? What is causing the 4-way machines to be only 2x the
performance of the 1-way machine and the 8-way machines to be < 3x the
performance? Is the system bus the limiting factor on those machines?

Curiosity aside, it looks like Ingo's scheduler is coming along nicely. 

-- 
akk~
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 23 2002 - 21:00:51 EST