lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Dec]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Subject[BENCHMARK] ext2 v ext3 with contest
    Date
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Here's a contest run comparing 2.5.52-mm2 on the same osdl hardware with the
    ext3 partitions mounted ext2 for comparison:

    noload:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 39.2 181 0 0 1.08
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 39.1 180 0 0 1.08
    not significant

    cacherun:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 36.5 194 0 0 1.01
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 36.1 194 0 0 1.00
    slight speedup here.

    process_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 46.5 152 8 41 1.28
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 48.3 144 10 48 1.33
    slight shift in the balance; no significant change

    ctar_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 52.8 154 1 10 1.46
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 47.2 163 1 7 1.30
    speedup with better overall cpu usage with ext2

    xtar_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 76.1 124 1 8 2.10
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 95.6 101 1 5 2.64
    interesting - a shift in the opposite direction here with ext2 much slower
    (large)

    io_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 74.5 112 11 20 2.06
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 77.4 118 11 13 2.14
    same here

    io_other:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 59.9 134 6 18 1.65
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 52.8 137 6 11 1.46
    slightly better with ext2

    read_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 50.5 147 5 6 1.39
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 49.3 149 5 6 1.36
    slightly better ext2

    list_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 43.7 167 0 9 1.21
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 43.4 166 0 9 1.20

    mem_load:
    Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
    2.5.52-mm2 [7] 66.0 141 39 3 1.82
    2552mm2ext2 [5] 63.9 145 38 3 1.76
    slightly better here

    It seems the (possibly?) faster writing with ext2 causes slowdowns under heavy
    writing loads on the same disk, but improvements with the other loads.

    Interesting results (not quite what I was expecting)

    Enjoy the festive season

    Cheers,
    Con
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQE+CEL2F6dfvkL3i1gRAq/1AJ4wsVsERAUng6ALtmpnMflpb8co0gCfTYWB
    JzOrStkqsDGV/fC+21N69f8=
    =pUSo
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    -
    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 13:31    [W:0.026 / U:29.812 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site