Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sat, 02 Apr 2005 12:19:35 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > >>Paul, you definitely want to check this out on your large numa box. I booted >>a kernel with this patch on a 32-way numa box and it took a long .... time >>to produce the cost matrix. > > > Is there anything fundamentally wrong with the notion of just initializing > the cost matrix to something that isn't completely wrong at bootup, and > just lettign user space fill it in? >
That's probably not a bad idea. You'd have to do things like set RT scheduling for your user tasks, and not have any other activity happening. So that effectively hangs your system for a while anyway.
But if you run it once and dump the output to a config file...
Anyway we're faced with the immediate problem of crap performance for 2.6.12 (for people with 1500 disks), so an in-kernel solution might be better in the short term. I'll see if we can adapt Ingo's thingy with something that is "good enough" and doesn't take years to run on a 512 way.
Nick
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |