Re: [REPORT] cfs-v5 vs sd-0.46

[Michael Gerdau <mgd@technosis.de>]

> oh, you are writing the number-cruncher?

Yep.

> In general the 'best'  
> performance metrics for scheduler validation are the ones where you have 
> immediate feedback: i.e. some ops/sec (or ops per minute) value in some 
> readily accessible place, or some "milliseconds-per-100,000 ops" type of 
> metric - whichever lends itself better to the workload at hand.

I'll have to see whether that works out. I don't have an easily
available ops/sec but I guess I could create something similar.

> If you  
> measure time then the best is to use long long and nanoseconds and the 
> monotonic clocksource:

[snip]
Thanks, I will implement that, for Linux anyway.

> Plus an absolute metric of "the whole workload took X.Y seconds" is 
> useful too.

That's the easiest to come by and is already available.

Best,
Michael
-- 
 Technosis GmbH, Geschäftsführer: Michael Gerdau, Tobias Dittmar
 Sitz Hamburg; HRB 89145 Amtsgericht Hamburg
 Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
 Michael Gerdau       email: mgd@technosis.de
 GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

Attachment: pgpxmbk2UV8jq.pgp
Description: PGP signature