Re: [REPORT] cfs-v5 vs sd-0.46

From: Michael Gerdau
Date: Tue Apr 24 2007 - 05:07:02 EST

> oh, you are writing the number-cruncher?


> In general the 'best'
> performance metrics for scheduler validation are the ones where you have
> immediate feedback: i.e. some ops/sec (or ops per minute) value in some
> readily accessible place, or some "milliseconds-per-100,000 ops" type of
> metric - whichever lends itself better to the workload at hand.

I'll have to see whether that works out. I don't have an easily
available ops/sec but I guess I could create something similar.

> If you
> measure time then the best is to use long long and nanoseconds and the
> monotonic clocksource:

Thanks, I will implement that, for Linux anyway.

> Plus an absolute metric of "the whole workload took X.Y seconds" is
> useful too.

That's the easiest to come by and is already available.

Technosis GmbH, Geschäftsführer: Michael Gerdau, Tobias Dittmar
Sitz Hamburg; HRB 89145 Amtsgericht Hamburg
Vote against SPAM - see
Michael Gerdau email: mgd@xxxxxxxxxxxx
GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature