Messages in this thread |  | | From | "Ricardo Galli" <> | Subject | RE: [reiserfs-dev] Re: New XFS, ReiserFS and Ext2 benchmarks | Date | Tue, 22 May 2001 11:48:39 +0200 |
| |
> My apologies, I meant that the make is probably compiler bound (I said CPU > bound) not FS bound.
We undertood ;-)
> > cp -ar, and I would like Yura to try to reproduce the cp -ar as > > it seems too > > good to be true. > We find that one must use cp and similar utilities (not
The cp -a figures are somehow interesting, I had to repeat it for evey file system because the cache has to be populated before copying, to avoid the influence of the file system where the kernel is copied from. I did it by doing several cps before mesurements.
Despite my "efforts", variances were much higher en XFS than in ReiserFS and Ext2. The ReiserFS individual times were closer to the average than the other.
Why? have no idea, I didn't do any analysis of the samples because I am not an expert in Statistics.
> compilers) to become FS > bound when using a Linux FS (unlike the older Unixes for which > compiles were > considered excellent benchmarks).
I was equally suprised, not only due to the wall-clock time but also to the CPU. So, I think the cache is the major player when compiling a kernel that was _just_ copied from another file system (still in buffer/cache).
> > Thanks for investing the time into this Ricardo.
It's just for fun....
--ricardo
- 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/
|  |