lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Weight-balanced binary tree + KVM growable memory slots using wbtree
On 02/23/2011 09:28 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> I had forgotten about<1M mem, so actually the slot configuration was:
>
> 0:<1M
> 1: 1M - 3.5G
> 2: 4G+
>
> I stacked the deck in favor of the static array (0: 4G+, 1: 1M-3.5G, 2:
> <1M), and got these kernbench results:
>
> base (stdev) reorder (stdev) wbtree (stdev)
> --------+-----------------+----------------+----------------+
> Elapsed | 42.809 (0.19) | 42.160 (0.22) | 42.305 (0.23) |
> User | 115.709 (0.22) | 114.358 (0.40) | 114.720 (0.31) |
> System | 41.605 (0.14) | 40.741 (0.22) | 40.924 (0.20) |
> %cpu | 366.9 (1.45) | 367.4 (1.17) | 367.6 (1.51) |
> context | 7272.3 (68.6) | 7248.1 (89.7) | 7249.5 (97.8) |
> sleeps | 14826.2 (110.6) | 14780.7 (86.9) | 14798.5 (63.0) |
>
> So, wbtree is only slightly behind reordering, and the standard
> deviation suggests the runs are mostly within the noise of each other.
> Thanks,

Doesn't this indicate we should use reordering, instead of a new data
structure?

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-02-24 11:09    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans