[nSLUG] 2.6 kernel performance

Donald Teed donald.teed at gmail.com
Tue Jun 21 16:04:37 ADT 2005


Read what I said originally again.

e.g. "In 2.4.31 the hdparm shows about 65 MB/sec, while in 2.6.12, I'm
seeing something around 40 MB/sec."

I'm looking for the same, not worse.  You can't blame anyone for not
wanting to go downhill, and we all know the 2.4 kernel will stop being
maintained some day.

I'm interested in making the 2.6 move at this point
of the migration to Debian where I have
a dual boot Gentoo/Debian set up and I can
use Gentoo as my safety net.  I think I'd also
like to have udev support.  Already I've run into
2 things that Debian did not supply in the default
/dev nodes: /dev/hd? where ? is > h ,
and /dev/usb/hid/*

In terms of a typical thing that would be impacted by
this performance issue, I would say opening up
an inbox with 3000 messages in it over IMAP would
be noticably slower.


On 6/21/05, Scott Walker <crimson at unspeakable.org> wrote:
> How can you expect better?
> 
> Kernel 2.6 from the get go was aimed at breaking linux into the
> enterprise level enviroment. 90% of the changes to the linux kernel have
> been implented for just this. Your not going to see a huge improvment on
> your desktop.
> 
> What you will see huge performance on is if this box was being pounded
> as a webserver, or as a database server. That is where all the
> performance improvements in 2.6 are going to shine.
> 
> Not at the low-end, reopening your cdplayer hoping to shave
> .2394823098492 seconds off your load time.
> 
> Stay with the default scheduler, The new schedulers are coded to provide
> better support for enterprise level system, that maybe need a different
> type of I/O scheduler in order to prosper in that enviroment.
> 
> Having run both 2.4 and 2.6 side by side on desktops of the same config,
> performance is about equal. Honestly there is no real need to move to
> 2.6 unless you need driver support for something.
> 
> In the future moving to a 2.6 kernel will prob be neccassary.
> 
> But digress.
> 
> Donald Teed wrote:
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nSLUG mailing list
> > nSLUG at nslug.ns.ca
> > http://nslug.ns.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nslug
> >
> >
> >
> 
> --
> EM: crimson at unspeakable.org WWW: http://www.unspeakable.org
> 
> -0)
>   /\  phear the penguin!
> _\_v
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nSLUG mailing list
> nSLUG at nslug.ns.ca
> http://nslug.ns.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nslug
> 
> 
> 
>

!DSPAM:42b864c513001884121031!




More information about the nSLUG mailing list