Re: Comparison between three trees (was: Latest numa/core release, v17)

2012-11-26 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 05:32:05PM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > SPECJBB: Single JVMs (one per node, 4 nodes), THP is disabled > > 3.7.0 3.7.0 3.7.0 > 3.7.0 3.7.0 3.7.0 >rc6-stats-

Re: Comparison between three trees (was: Latest numa/core release, v17)

2012-11-26 Thread Mel Gorman
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 04:47:15PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote: > On 11/24/12, Mel Gorman wrote: > > Warning: This is an insanely long mail and there a lot of data here. Get > > coffee or something. > > > > This is another round of comparisons between the latest released versions > > of each of

Re: Comparison between three trees (was: Latest numa/core release, v17)

2012-11-25 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 05:32:05PM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > > SPECJBB: Single JVMs (one per node, 4 nodes), THP is enabled > > > SPECJBB: Single JVMs (one per node, 4 nodes), THP is disabled Just to clarify, the "JVMs (one per node, 4 nodes)" was a cut&paste error. Single JVM meant that ther

Re: Comparison between three trees (was: Latest numa/core release, v17)

2012-11-25 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 05:32:05PM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > From here, we're onto the single JVM configuration. I suspect > this is tested much more commonly but note that it behaves very > differently to the multi JVM configuration as explained by Andrea > (http://choon.net/forum/read.php?21,159

Re: Comparison between three trees (was: Latest numa/core release, v17)

2012-11-25 Thread Hillf Danton
On 11/24/12, Mel Gorman wrote: > Warning: This is an insanely long mail and there a lot of data here. Get > coffee or something. > > This is another round of comparisons between the latest released versions > of each of three automatic numa balancing trees that are out there. > > From the se