Linux 2.6.32 Kernel Benchmarks

[kraftman]

I'm starting to think that those big boys should really start testing and profiling their crap. I wonder how 2.6.24 would compare. Good article.

They actually do, but they also do proper benchmarks. I wonder if generic kernels were tested here and still ext4 vs different mount options (or mentioned commit which changed behavior) and maybe even different settings like NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS which is default in Karmic and it affects benchmarks numbers. Btw, what are you talking about if it was planned change?

And like Michael pointed:

The very significant drop in PostgreSQL's performance in the Linux 2.6.32 kernel with default options can be attributed to this lone Git commit that is for a fix to address cache flushing in ext4_sync_file for the EXT4 file-system. This commit improves data integrity in the event of a power loss or other problem, but carries a high disk performance penalty.

[kraftman]

No idea what's wrong with ext4, but Con Kolivas needs three cheers for getting them to finally fix their damn scheduler.

Apache benchmark is meaningless. Not sure about others, but it's probably because of change in Ext4 like Michael said. Con's scheduler is slower in Apache. Btw. notice performance in not disk related benchmars is as it should be.

[Ranguvar]

No idea what's wrong with ext4, but Con Kolivas needs three cheers for getting them to finally fix their damn scheduler.

Well, CK and Dark Shikari. http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=185

@Phoronix team:

...the Linux 2.6.32 kernel had the lowest overall CPU usage when using X-Video with MPlayer.

Not lowest. Either 'worst', or 'highest'.

[Jimmy]

Meh, just get an ups and mount with nobarrier.

[Darkfire Fox]

I was really psyched about Ext4 when it first came out, but perhaps I should just stick with good old Ext3 for another year...

[Michael]

Read: http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14285 where PTS shows the specific commit that causes the performance drop.

[Ant P.]

This x264 boost is rather interesting, but this postmark and iozone regressions are due to the ext4 "problem"?

No idea what's wrong with ext4, but Con Kolivas needs three cheers for getting them to finally fix their damn scheduler.

[blackshard]

I'm starting to think that those big boys should really start testing and profiling their crap. I wonder how 2.6.24 would compare. Good article.

I asbolutely quote here.

[Apopas]

This x264 boost is rather interesting, but this postmark and iozone regressions are due to the ext4 "problem"?

[hax0r]

I'm starting to think that those big boys should really start testing and profiling their crap. I wonder how 2.6.24 would compare. Good article.