On Wednesday 13 February 2002 23:27, Ian Barwick wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 February 2002 21:07, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > NAMEDATALEN's benchmarked are 32, 64, 128 and 512. Attached is the
> > shell script I used to do it.
>
> Attached is a modified version for Linux, if anyone is interested.
>
> Will run it overnight out of quasi-scientific interest.
>
> Nice to have an idea what kind of effect my very long NAMEDATALEN setting
> (128) has.
Below the probably quite uninformative results, run under Linux with 2.2.16
on an AMD K2 350Mhz with 256MB RAM, EIDE HDs and other run of the mill
hardware.
I suspect some of the normal system jobs which usually run during the night
caused the wildly varying results. Whatever else, for my purposes at least
any performance issues with differening NAMEDATALENgths are nothing much
to worry about.
NAMEDATALEN: 32
220.73 real 3.39 user 0.10 sys
110.03 real 2.77 user 4.42 sys
NAMEDATALEN: 64
205.31 real 3.55 user 0.08 sys
109.76 real 2.53 user 4.18 sys
NAMEDATALEN: 128
224.65 real 3.35 user 0.10 sys
121.30 real 2.60 user 3.89 sys
NAMEDATALEN: 256
209.48 real 3.62 user 0.11 sys
118.90 real 3.00 user 3.88 sys
NAMEDATALEN: 512
204.65 real 3.36 user 0.14 sys
115.12 real 2.54 user 3.88 sys
Ian Barwick
