Messages in this thread | | | From | Shawn Starr <> | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] EXT3 vs EXT2 results with rmap14a and testing with contest 0.34 | Date | Thu, 19 Sep 2002 00:21:21 -0400 |
| |
Legend:
Kernel Time CPU 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d(EXT2) 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d(EXT3)
On September 19, 2002 12:16 am, Shawn Starr wrote: > Sorry about the confusing email before. This should make more sense =) > > These results compare EXT3 against EXT2 with rmap using the contest tool > you can get it at: http://contest.kolivas.net > > These tests are from a Athlon MP 2000+ w/ 512MB RAM > > noload: > > Kernel Time CPU > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 259.47 99% > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 267.66 97% > > process load: > > Kernel Time CPU > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 318.91 80% > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 324.44 79% > > io halfmem: > > Kernel Time CPU > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 306.82 87% > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 461.74 57% > > io full mem: > > Kernel Time CPU > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 325.39 82% > 2.4.20-pre7-rmap14a-xfs-uml-shawn12d 411.47 64% > > full logs of the tests are: > > WITH EXT2 > ------------ > noload Time: 259.47 CPU: 99% Major Faults: 770937 Minor Faults: 1173705 > process load Time: 318.91 CPU: 80% Major Faults: 742261 Minor Faults: > 1169516 > io halfmem Time: 306.82 CPU: 87% Major Faults: 742000 Minor Faults: > 1169497 Was writing number 33 of a 257Mb sized io load file after 307 > seconds io fullmem Time: 325.39 CPU: 82% Major Faults: 742000 Minor > Faults: 1169494 Was writing number 16 of a 514Mb sized io load file after > 337 seconds mem load Time: 340.32 CPU: 79% Major Faults: 743307 Minor > Faults: 1170011 > > > WITH EXT3 > ----------- > > noload Time: 267.66 CPU: 97% Major Faults: 771111 Minor Faults: 1173722 > process load Time: 324.44 CPU: 79% Major Faults: 742261 Minor Faults: > 1169518 > io halfmem Time: 461.74 CPU: 57% Major Faults: 742000 Minor Faults: > 1169496 Was writing number 34 of a 257Mb sized io load file after 465 > seconds io fullmem Time: 411.47 CPU: 64% Major Faults: 742000 Minor > Faults: 1169494 Was writing number 15 of a 514Mb sized io load file after > 425 seconds mem load Time: 333.99 CPU: 81% Major Faults: 743320 Minor > Faults: 1170021 > > NOTES: > ==== > > As you can see, there's something DEFINATELY wrong here. EXT3 is much > slower then EXT2. I converted the EXT3 disk back to EXT2 to do the second > test. > > Also, I specified no mount options for EXT3 (which means it uses ordered > mode). The journal was created with tune2fs -j /dev/hda# > > > From #Kernelnewbies (snip) > ============== > <ShawnCONSOLE> riel uses EXT3 > <riel> my cpu is slower > <ShawnCONSOLE> but you have fast disks? > <riel> so it doesn't fall idle as quickly as yours, when waiting on the > disk <riel> not very fast ;) > <riel> old 8 GB IDE disk > <ShawnCONSOLE> so having a fast disk and a fast CPU causes the cpu to wait > longer cause the disk finishes its tasks much faster then the cpu expects? > <ShawnCONSOLE> mem load final test = 78% > <ShawnCONSOLE> so final numbers: > <ShawnCONSOLE> 99, 80%, 87%, 83%, 75% > <riel> yes, a very fast CPU falls idle more quickly > <riel> but it's very curious that ext3 is that much worse than ext2 > <ShawnCONSOLE> thats much better. > <riel> definately worth pointing out to the ext3 maintainers.
- 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/
| |