linux-kernel - [MMTests] dbench4 async on ext3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120723212146.GG9222@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:21:46 +0100
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [MMTests] dbench4 async on ext3

Configuration:	global-dhp__io-dbench4-async-ext3
Result: 	http://www.csn.ul.ie/~mel/postings/mmtests-20120424/global-dhp__io-dbench4-async-ext3
Benchmarks:	dbench4

Summary
=======

In general there was a massive drop in throughput after 3.0. Very broadly
speaking it looks like the Read operation got faster but at the cost of
a big regression in the Flush operation.

Benchmark notes
===============

mkfs was run on system startup. No attempt was made to age it. No
special mkfs or mount options were used.

dbench 4 was used. Tests ran for 180 seconds once warmed up. A varying
number of clients were used up to 64*NR_CPU. osync, sync-directory and
fsync were all off.

===========================================================
Machine:	arnold
Result:		http://www.csn.ul.ie/~mel/postings/mmtests-20120424/global-dhp__io-dbench4-async-ext3/arnold/comparison.html
Arch:		x86
CPUs:		1 socket, 2 threads
Model:		Pentium 4
Disk:		Single Rotary Disk
===========================================================

dbench4
-------

  Generally worse with a big drop in throughput after 3.0 for small number
  of clients. In some cases there is an improvement in latency for 3.0
  and later kernels but not always.

==========================================================
Machine:	hydra
Result:		http://www.csn.ul.ie/~mel/postings/mmtests-20120424/global-dhp__io-dbench4-async-ext3/hydra/comparison.html
Arch:		x86-64
CPUs:		1 socket, 4 threads
Model:		AMD Phenom II X4 940
Disk:		Single Rotary Disk
Status:		Ok
==========================================================

dbench4
-------
  Similar to arnold, big drop in throughput after 3.0 for small numbers
  of clients. Unlike arnold, this is matched by an improvement in latency
  so it may be the case that IO is more fair even if dbench complains
  about the latency. Very very broadly speaking, it looks like the read
  operation got a lot faster but flush got a lot slower.

==========================================================
Machine:	sandy
Result:		http://www.csn.ul.ie/~mel/postings/mmtests-20120424/global-dhp__io-dbench4-async-ext3/sandy/comparison.html
Arch:		x86-64
CPUs:		1 socket, 8 threads
Model:		Intel Core i7-2600
Disk:		Single Rotary Disk
Status:		
==========================================================

dbench4
-------
  Same story, big drop in throughput after 3.0 with flush again looking very
  expensive for 3.1 and later kernels. Latency figures are a mixed bag.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/