On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, David Rientjes wrote: > There are a couple differences between how you're using it compared to how > I showed the initial regression between slab and slub, however: you're > using localhost for your netserver which isn't representative of a real > networking round-robin workload and you're using a smaller system with > eight cores. We never measured a _significant_ performance problem with > slub compared to slab with four or eight cores, the problem only emerges > on larger systems. Larger systems would more NUMA support than is present in the current patches. > When running this patchset on two (client and server running > netperf-2.4.5) four 2.2GHz quad-core AMD processors with 64GB of memory, > here's the results: What is their NUMA topology? I dont have anything beyond two nodes here. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>