lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Re: 2.1.xxx makes Electric Fence 22x slower
Date

Bruno's patch gives excellent performance in my Electric Fence
example.

Here is a summary of all the results to date. They include two
fuzzy hash patches from Andrey V. Savochkin, and today's AVL
Tree patch from Bruno Haible. I have continued to perform the
tests as consistently as possible -- immediately after a fresh
reboot in each case.

The two numbers in each line are elapsed times in seconds for
the application linked (1) without Electric Fence, and (2) with
Electric Fence, respectively.

2.0.34 : 3.82, 14.61
2.1.117, no patches : 3.71, 325.85
2.1.111, 1st fuzzy hash patch : 3.76, 29.73
2.1.119, 2nd fuzzy hash patch : 3.71, 20.88
2.1.119, AVL Tree patch : 3.73, 13.93

The decimal digits shown are not all significant, so please
don't infer too much precision from them.

I am aware that the question, of how (or possibly whether?)
this problem should be solved, is controversial. Certainly
it isn't my intention to be inflammatory in presenting this
data. I'm just an interested onlooker (and user) who is
grateful for the willingness and expertise you guys are
bringing to this issue.

Thanks,

Richard D. McRoberts
Loveland, Colorado USA
rdm@verinet.com


-
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/faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.098 / U:1.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site