While searching on the net, I found a script on following home page of dledford http://people.redhat.com/dledford/
I tried this and ate all the 6GB memory. Pretty cool I am still looking for something good to stress hard drive. Something like IOMeter by Intel. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Summerfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:18 PM Subject: Re: How to stress the system hardware ?? > > To stress test the CPU, RAM and disks (well, mostly disk access), my personal > > > > favorite is what a co-worker, UNIX guru showed me. Set up the following shell > > > > scripts and run 5-20 (or more) copies of each of them depending on the size > > of your hardware. > > > > Script 1 > > ----------------------- > > #!/bin/sh > > > > # Comment in and out according to your HW > > # For SCSI > > cp /dev/sda /dev/null > > > > #For IDE > > cp /dev/hda /dev/null > > ----------------------- > > I don't know that sequential copies actually exercise very much. Even > 20 in parallel - the data from the first should be cached and I'd > expect them to keep in step for however long it takes. > > The first to read a new sector blocks and waits for the others to catch > up. > > > > > > Script 2 > > ----------------------- > > #!/bin/sh > > > > find / | cpio -o | compress > /dev/null > > # replace "compress" with "gzip" or "bzip2" if you like > > ----------------------- > > > > In the past, I usually run more of script2 then script1 so that memory and > > CPU get eaten up fairly well. Throwing in a linux kernel source compile > > wouldn't hurt either. > > Again, they're reading the same data. > > A couple of years ago I had 64 Mbytes RAM on my Pentium II. Now it has > 256 Mbytes "because it's cheap." The probability of data being kept in > cache long enough for all processes to use it is high. > > > > > > Note: you may have to tune up your system to have these scripts run > > well; see http://linuxperf.nl.linux.org or other Linux performance tuning sit > > e > > > > For network you can add some copying to or from NFS or samba filesystems or > > use something like iperf or ttcp (correct name?). > > Whether this will stress the network depends on how good your drives > are. I get around 5 Mbytes/sec of my Pentium systems disks, much less > than the 100 Mbit network can deliver. > > > The caveats I mentioned before remain - it's not scientific, it's > useful as a rough measure of whether it works, but not a good guide to > how well. > > For that you need well-designed benchmarks, preferably tailored to your > own usage of the computer equipment. > > > > > -- > Cheers > John Summerfield > > Microsoft's most solid OS: http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/ > > Note: mail delivered to me is deemed to be intended for me, for my > disposition. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Redhat-devel-list mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Redhat-devel-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
