Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 17:00:13 +0200 From: "Attilio Rao" <attilio@freebsd.org> To: "Robert Watson" <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fine grain select locking. Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10707040800p4e003df0p65e2b802f81ec51e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20070704124833.W37059@fledge.watson.org> References: <20070702230728.E552@10.0.0.1> <20070703181242.T552@10.0.0.1> <20070704105525.GU45894@elvis.mu.org> <20070704124833.W37059@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2007/7/4, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>: > There seem to be two parts of owning a benchmark: > > - Establishing baselines over time -- how doe FreeBSD 4.8, 5.5, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, > 6-STABLE weekly, 7-CURRENT weekly, and maybe a Linux or NetBSD version > perform for the workload using otherwise identical configuration. > > - Measurement and feedback -- identifying bottlenecks, working with developers > to measure the results of specific optimizations, etc, across the life cycle > of the patch. Another problem here would be about the hardware availabilty (obviously I'm speaking about scalability improvements). Until now, tests have been done mainly on amd64 machines provided by Kris and Jeff, IIRC. Having a wider range of targets would help a lot in these cases. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe10707040800p4e003df0p65e2b802f81ec51e>