[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM
    "Davide Libenzi" <> said:


    > 300 running processes ( I say running not in runqueue )
    > 12 up to 35 in runqueue
    > I get an 83% performance improvement

    I have yet to see a machine capable of such a load. And when I see it, it
    will be a cluster or a massive SMP machine anyway. Load averages here
    rarely go to 10 or so, for multiuser machines that do time as servers on
    the side. Not that this is a large shop, but I'say we are rather on the
    high side of average around here.

    > 2 running processes ( that switch at the same rate of 300 )
    > I get 11% up to 15% performance loss

    This is a personal workstation scenario. There you have peole that are
    worried about minimizing latencies (long thread about that recently) for
    playing MP3s or other not-so-soft realtime tasks, and getting the most
    performance out of the machine.

    > But the fact is that normally 2 tasks switches at a very lower factor then
    > 300.

    Why? That depends mostly on the tasks, and if the tasks are the same, this
    should not change very much (unless the machine is swamped with interrupts,
    and then your problem is another one).

    I'd like to see hard numbers of _real_ workloads that'd allow me to relate
    your benchamrk numbers to reality. I'm not too worried about a few percent
    increase in schedule() time on a mostly idle personal machine, I'm worried
    about that few percent on a loaded machine (10 or so tasks around here,
    usually) that is _far_ from your hundreds of running tasks scenarios.
    Dr. Horst H. von Brand
    Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
    Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
    Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.037 / U:2.052 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site