Re: Eric Whitney's ext4 scaling data

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 04:06:47PM +0100, Lukáš Czerner wrote:
> It'll take me some time to process the results, but just one small
> nitpick is that in the mail server workload the reads and writes are
> not really representative for "just reads" or "just writes" as with
> the other tests since both interfere with each other. I am
> mentioning this just so that people do not misinterpret the results.

Yes, that's true.  The mail server workload is also one where the
benchmark results tend to be more variable, and so Eric has mentioned
in the past that he's had to run the benchmark several times to make
sure he's getting good, stable, numbers.

The nubmers are useful for seeing whether we've accidentally regressed
on scalability, but at least for previous results from Eric's
scalability testing, what I've found most interesting thing to look at
are the lockstat reports.

						- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux