Nick Piggin wrote on Thursday, October 06, 2005 3:04 AM
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>dbench is catching some attention. We just ran it with default
> >>parameter. I don't think default parameter is the right one to use
> >>on some of our configurations. For example, it shows +100% improvement
> >
> > never ever consider dbench a serious benchmark; the thing is you can
> > make dbench a lot better very easy; just make the kernel run one thread
> > at a time until completion. dbench really gives very variable results,
> > but it is not really possible to say if +100% or -100% is an improvement
> > or a degredation for real life. So please just don't run it, or at least
> > don't interpret the results in a "higher is better" way.
> >
>
> As a disk IO performance benchmark you are absolutely right.
>
> Some people like using it to test VM scalability and throughput
> if it is being used on tmpfs. In that case the results are
> generally more stable.
Thank you for the suggestion, we will look into the options. I agree here
as well, and I also don't consider dbench as a serious disk I/O performance
benchmark. There are other workloads that we ran (IOzone, aiostress, and my
favorite "industry standard database workload") which covers disk I/O side
pretty well.
- Ken
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
