lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Performance Results for Ingo's O(1)-scheduler
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:16:28 -0800
Ryan Cumming <bodnar42@phalynx.dhs.org> wrote:

> On January 21, 2002 19:55, Adam Keys wrote:
> > I'm curious about the performance of the 4-way and 8-way systems. I know
> > nothing about this benchmark. IIRC correctly it simulates chat clients
> > connecting to a server and talking to each other. Is it a CPU, memory, or
> > disk bound benchmark? What is causing the 4-way machines to be only 2x the
> > performance of the 1-way machine and the 8-way machines to be < 3x the
> > performance? Is the system bus the limiting factor on those machines?
>
> Memory bus, lock contention, syncronization issues. SMP really isn't as
> magical as people think after the overhead is taken in to account.

Volcanomark is a Java(TM) chatroom benchmark: multiple rooms, where for each
room, every input from a client generates a write to every other client
(think broadcast storm).

chat (which is a C version of Volcanomark) is useful for testing, as is
hackbench2 (which is cut down to just exhibit the runqueue problem, and
doesn't even use threads).

Hope that helps,
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.032 / U:0.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site