Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 30 May 2008 10:36:05 -0400 | From | "John Stoffel" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/25] Vm Pageout Scalability Improvements (V8) - continued |
| |
Rik> On Fri, 30 May 2008 09:52:48 -0400 Rik> "John Stoffel" <john@stoffel.org> wrote:
>> I haven't seen any performance numbers talking about how well this >> stuff works on single or dual CPU machines with smaller amounts of >> memory, or whether it's worth using on these machines at all? >> >> The big machines with lots of memory and lots of CPUs are certainly >> becoming more prevalent, but for my home machine with 4Gb RAM and dual >> core, what's the advantage? >> >> Let's not slow down the common case for the sake of the bigger guys if >> possible.
Rik> I wouldn't call your home system with 4GB RAM "small".
*grin* me either in some ways. But my other main linux box, which acts as an NFS server has 2Gb of RAM, but a pair of PIII Xeons at 550mhz. This is the box I'd be worried about in some ways, since it handles a bunch of stuff like backups, mysql, apache, NFS server, etc.
Rik> After all, the VM that Linux currently has was developed mostly Rik> on machines with less than 1GB of RAM and later encrusted in Rik> bandaids to make sure the large systems did not fail too badly.
Sure, I understand.
Rik> As for small system performance, I believe that my patch series Rik> should cause no performance regressions on those systems and has Rik> a framework that allows us to improve performance on those Rik> systems too.
Great! It would be nice to just be able to track this nicely.
Rik> If you manage to break performance with my patch set somehow, Rik> please let me know so I can fix it. Something like the VM is Rik> very subtle and any change is pretty much guaranteed to break Rik> something, so I am very interested in feedback.
What are you using to test/benchmark your changes as you develop this patchset? What would you suggest as a test load to help check performance?
John
| |