Nick Piggin wrote on Monday, February 13, 2006 7:44 PM
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Well I don't see any benchmark numbers in the original patch. Just an
> > assertion that it "should" help something.
> >
> The regression was in a Ken's commercial database benchmark. I couldn't
> reproduce it but presumably it did fix it otherwise Ken would would have
> piped up?
I wasn't entirely happy though ;-)
> > I'm more inclined to revert it and not add the sysctl (ugh) until we have a
> > good reason to do so.
> >
>
> If you revert this then Ken's database benchmark gets worse. Hence the
> sysctl.
Yes, Nick is correct. For db workload, the wake-ups type are mixed.
Some of them are random, some of them are not because we do interrupt
binding. The break down between random/fixed is about 30/70. Thus,
Nick's patch helps 30% of time. With sysctl, we can regain the entire
up side for db workload while retain workload on the other end of
spectrum.
- 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]
