Re: [PATCH 1a/7] dlm: core locking

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@istop.com>]

On Friday 29 April 2005 17:52, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> * Without LKM_LOCAL:
> [root@ca-test7 ocfs2]# time tar -zxf /tmp/linux-2.6.11.7.tar.gz
>
> real    0m39.699s
> user    0m3.644s
> sys     0m8.076s
>
> * With LKM_LOCAL
> [root@ca-test7 ocfs2]# time tar -zxf /tmp/linux-2.6.11.7.tar.gz
>
> real    0m22.076s
> user    0m3.869s
> sys     0m7.234s
>
> So yes, I'd say it's worth a significant amount of performance to us :)

To be precise, LKM_LOCAL saves you 44%, and even without LKM_LOCAL you turn in 
a respectable number.  Could you please provide your node, shared disk and 
network specs?

Because I am greedy, I would like to have seen the Ext3 number, too.  And oh 
yes, the Ext2 number!

Regards,

Daniel
-
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/