On 07/08/2012 08:23 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
On 07/07/2012 12:23 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
On 07/06/2012 12:42 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
Which mechanism to address skew error? The netperf manual describes
more than one:
This mechanism is missed in my test, I would add them to my test scripts.
http://www.netperf.org/svn/netperf2/trunk/doc/netperf.html#Using-Netperf-to-Measure-Aggregate-Performance
Personally, my preference these days is to use the "demo mode" method
of aggregate results as it can be rather faster than (ab)using the
confidence intervals mechanism, which I suspect may not really scale
all that well to large numbers of concurrent netperfs.
During my test, the confidence interval would even hard to achieved in
RR test when I pin vhost/vcpus in the processors, so I didn't use it.
When running aggregate netperfs, *something* has to be done to address
the prospect of skew error. Otherwise the results are suspect.
happy benchmarking,
rick jones
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
