| To: | Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1 |
| From: | Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 9 Jan 2001 17:48:32 +0100 (CET) |
| Cc: | "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, <riel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <E14G1mB-0006vF-00@the-village.bc.nu> |
| Reply-to: | <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > We have already shown that the IO-plugging API sucks, I'm afraid.
> >
> > it might not be important to others, but we do hold one particular
> > SPECweb99 world record: on 2-way, 2 GB RAM, testing a load with a full
>
> And its real world value is exactly the same as the mindcraft NT
> values. Don't forget that.
( what you have not quoted is the part that says that the fileset is 9GB.
This is one of the busiest and most complex block-IO Linux systems i've
ever seen, this is why i quoted it - the talk was about block-IO
performance, and Stephen said that our block IO sucks. It used to suck,
but in 2.4, with the right patch from Jens, it doesnt suck anymore. )
Ingo
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1, Ingo Molnar |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1, Alan Cox |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1, Alan Cox |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1, Alan Cox |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |