Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 21:48:02 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: performance@FreeBSD.org, Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk> Subject: Re: Performance Tracker project update Message-ID: <4797A802.8060509@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20080123202433.E63024@fledge.watson.org> References: <4796C717.9000507@cederstrand.dk> <20080123193400.N63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A245.7080202@cederstrand.dk> <20080123202433.E63024@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: >> I think it's best if participating machines supply data regularly for >> an extended period of time. Single or infrequent data points for a >> specific configuration don't make much sense. We need to compare >> apples to apples. > > Yes -- I was mostly thinking about backdating in order to play "catchup" > when a new benchmark is introduced. One thing I am looking at is how to best create a library of world tarballs that can be used to populate a nfsroot (or hybrid of periodic tarballs + binary diffs to save space). Then you could provide your benchmark in a standardized format (start/end/cleanup scripts, etc) and tell a machine "go and run this benchmark on every daily snapshot for the last year and give me the numbers". Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4797A802.8060509>