lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: bad lmbench numbers for mmap
> From: David Miller <davem@twiddle.net>
>
> Wait a second, lat_mmap touches a large part of the set of pages in
> the mmap'd area. If the Solaris machine had half as much memory, and
> lat_mmap used a smaller upper limit on the size of the mmap'd area,
> then the difference in performance makes sense.

ouch. you're right of course. I was misled by the fact that the table
just said "mmap latency". so it's not so horrible as I thought, but it's
still pretty bad. I just posted the raw numbers and we are roughly
twice as slow as solaris.

ganesh

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.022 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site