RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark

On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 16:59 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:

> > 
> > to run the tests.  The results are about the same as the non-NUMA case,
> > with slab about 5% better than slub.  
> 
> Hmmmm... both tests were run in the same context? NUMA has additional 
> overhead in other areas.

Both slab and slub tests are tested with the same NUMA options and
config.

Tim
-
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/

Follow-Ups:
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>

References:
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: "Chen, Tim C" <[email protected]>
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Tim Chen <[email protected]>
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Tim Chen <[email protected]>
- RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
Next by Date: Re: mkfs.ext2 triggerd RAM corruption
Previous by thread: RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
Next by thread: RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]