Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.51 with contest

From: Robert Love (
Date: Tue Dec 10 2002 - 16:05:27 EST

On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 15:02, Stan Bubrouski wrote:

> I disagree, 2.4.20 is the current stable kernel, it would
> be nice to see how it compares to the current development,
> what's faster, what's not... from Con's previous results
> we can see that some things are indeed not as fast in 2.5.x
> as in 2.4.x. It's just nice to be able to see the whole
> picture. I often follow these threads for just this purpose.

Like I said, that may give users warm fuzzies or be helpful to marketing
folks but Con's benchmark is not really useful for _helping developers_
wrt comparing 2.4 vs 2.5.

A benchmark like AIM9, which is a bunch of micro-benchmarks, is useful
because we can say "look truncating a zero-length file is a lot slower

But a contest result from 2.4 to 2.5 tells us what? Especially since
lower times in contest may not even be bad. Contest is invaluable for
testing one change vs. without. In fact, I would venture to say Con's
work is a big reason why 2.5 has the fairness and interactive
performance it does. But it is not so helpful to see changes since 2.4.

        Robert Love

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 15 2002 - 22:00:18 EST