[nSLUG] 2.6 kernel performance

Donald Teed donald.teed at gmail.com
Tue Jun 21 15:32:08 ADT 2005


If I really felt there was no point in getting good performance
out of my PCs I'd buy 5400 RPM disks and stick with 64 MB RAM
and PII 233 Mhz.  I can't think of anyone like that, regardless of
whether they were a former Gentoo user.

I'm not trying to outperform anything.  But if I do switch to
a 2.6 kernel, I am not accepting a performance loss - it
should at least be equal to that of 2.4 kernel, as it has
been for most other machines I've run a 2.6 kernel on - a
laptop, a Sun, and a desktop single processor machine
without RAID.

A kernel isn't a kernel like a rose is a rose.
There are dozens of settings that can be combined
improperly, or options missed, and it can cause problems.
And that is why I'm seeking input from anyone else
who has seen a similar configuration or knows something
about the new 2.6 kernel options related to scheduler
and possibly other aspects I have not considered.

However given what you've offered, I'll also try no
scheduler and see how that performs.


On 6/21/05, Stephen Gregory <nslug at kernelpanic.ca> wrote:
> I have a tip: don't waste you time. At three users your server is
> terribly under utilized. If any of the schedulers perform better it
> will be the default. The other schedulers don't improve performance
> until you hit hundreds of processes blocking on io.
> 
> If you wish to test your RAID performance use Bonnie++. There is
> Debian package. As your server will be bound by Windows and SAMBA's
> performance disk performance will be a non issue.
> 
> 
> Part of the problem with Gentoo is that you get into a mentality that
> tweaking will give big performance improvements. It won't. Apart from
> using a kernel compiled for your cpu there isn't much that you should
> bother doing.
> 
> --
> sg

!DSPAM:42b85d278316296416002!




More information about the nSLUG mailing list