Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:42:24 -0700 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: Benchmarking objrmap under memory pressure |
| |
> As expected the 6 second difference was nothing compared the the noise, > though I'd be curious to see an average number.
Yeah, I don't think either is worse or better - I really want a more stable test though, if I can find one.
> the degradation of runtimes is interesting, runtimes should go downs not > up after more unused stuff is pushed into swap and so more ram is free > at every new start of the workload.
Yeah, that's odd.
> BTW, I've no idea idea why you used an UP machine for this, (plus if you
Because it's frigging hard to make a 16GB machine swap ;-) 'twas just my desktop.
> critical app is using mremap on anonymous COW memory to save ram). You > definitely should use your 32-way booted with mem=512m to run this test > or there's no way you'll ever botice the additional boost in scalability > that anon-vma provides compared to anonmm, and that anonmm will never be > able to reach.
Yeah, it's hard to do mem= on NUMA, but I have a patch from someone somehwere. Those machines don't tend to swap heavily anyway, but I suppose page reclaim in general will happen.
M.
- 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/
| |