Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: TPC-C benchmark used standard RH kernel | Date | Thu, 19 Sep 2002 14:15:34 -0500 | From | "Bond, Andrew" <> |
| |
I am actually moving in that direction. I don't know if I will be able to use the same setup or not, but I will post once I get some data. I can post that I saw X% delta going from 2.4 to 2.5. I can't help it if anyone extrapolates data from there ;-)
Andy
> -----Original Message----- > From: Martin J. Bligh [mailto:mbligh@aracnet.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 3:06 PM > To: Bond, Andrew; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: TPC-C benchmark used standard RH kernel > > > > Could we have gotten better performance by patching the > kernel? Sure. There are many new features in 2.5 that would > enhance database performance. However, the fairly strict > support requirements of TPC benchmarking mean that we need to > benchmark a kernel that a Linux distributor ships and can support. > > Modifications could also be taken to the extreme, and we > could have built a screamer kernel that runs Oracle TPC-C's > and nothing else. However, that doesn't really tell us > anything useful and doesn't help those customers thinking > about running Linux. The question also becomes "Who would > provide customer support for that kernel?" > > Unofficial results for 2.5 vs 2.4 (or 2.4-redhatAS) would be most > interesting if you're able to gather them, and still have the > machine. Most times you can avoid their draconian rules by saying > "on a large benchmark test that I can't name but you all know what > it is ..." instead of naming it ... ;-) > > M. > > - 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/
| |