lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.0 performance problems
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Roger Luethi wrote:

> For the systematic testing, I used "qsbench -p 4 -m 96" on a 256 MB
> machine. This allowed the kernel to achieve high performance with
> unfairness -- that's what 2.4 does: One process dominates all others
> and finishes very early, taking away most of the memory pressure.
> The spike for qsbench in 2.5.39 remains if only one process is forked
> (-p1 -m 384), though.
>
> I asked for the bk export numbers with 2.5.39 because I'm curious how
> close to qsbench the behavior really is.

2.5.39 won't compile for me "out of the box". I thought it might have
been the toolset, but I was running RH8 and it has gcc 3.2. Was there a
big change between 3.2 and 3.3.2 in Fedora Core 1? The reason I ask is
that I also can't get NISTNet to compile on Fedora Core 1 or RHEL WS 3.
It looks like incompatible libraries.
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.041 / U:2.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site