[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121116174918.GA4723@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:49:18 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Benchmark results: "Enhanced NUMA scheduling with adaptive
affinity"
* Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:56:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de> wrote:
> >
> > > It is important to know how this was configured. I was running
> > > one JVM per node and the JVMs were sized that they should fit
> > > in the node. [...]
> >
> > That is not what I tested: as I described it in the mail I
> > tested 32 warehouses: i.e. spanning the whole system.
> >
>
> Good (sortof) [...]
Not just 'sortof' good but it appears it's unconditionally good:
meanwhile other testers have reproduced the single-JVM speedup
with the latest numa/core code as well, so the speedup is not
just on my system.
Please post your kernel .config so I can check why the 4x JVM
test does not perform so well on your system. Maybe there's
something special to your system.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists