On 20/10/10 7:01 PM, "Grant McWilliams" <grantmasterflash at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Tom Bishop <bishoptf at gmail.com> wrote: >> Ok so I'd like to help, since most folks have Intel Chipsets, I have a AMD >> 4p(16 core)/32gig memory opteron server that I'm running that we can get some >> numbers on....but it would be nice if we could run apples to apples...I have >> iozone loaded and can run that but would be nice to run using the same >> parameters....is there any way we could list the types of test we would like >> to run and the actual command with options listed and then we would have some >> thing to compare at least level the playing field...KB, any thoughts, is >> this a good idea? >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:52 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: >>> On 10/20/2010 12:35 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: >>>> Being skeptical is the best approach in the absence of >>>> verifiable/falsifiable data. Today or tomorrow I'll get my hands on a new >>>> host system and although it is supposed to go into production immediately I >>>> will probably find some time to do some rudimentary benchmarking in that >>>> regard to see if this is worth investigating further. Right now I'm >>> >>> That sounds great. I've got a machine coming online in the next few days >>> as well and will do some testing on there. Its got 2 of these : >>> >>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5310 >>> >>> So not the newest/greatest, but should be fairly representative. >>> >>>> planning to use fio for block device measurements but don't know any decent >>>> (and uncomplicated) network i/o benchmarking tools. Any ideas what tools I >>>> could use to quickly get some useful data on this from the machine? >>> >>> iozone and openssl speed tests are always a good thing to run as a 'warm >>> up' to your app level testing. Since pgtest has been posted here >>> already, I'd say that is definitely one thing to include so it creates a >>> level of common-code-testing and comparison. mysql-bench is worth >>> hitting as well. I have a personal interest in web app delivery, so a >>> apache-bench hosted from an external machine hitting domU's / VM's ( but >>> more than 1 instance, and hitting more than 1 VM / domU at the same time >>> ) would be good to have as well. >>> >>> And yes, publish lots of machine details and also details on the code / >>> platform / versions used. I will try to do the same ( but will limit my >>> testing to whats already available in the distro ) >>> >>> thanks >>> >>> - KB >>> ______ > > > So what we're on the verge of doing here is creating a test set... I'd love to > see a shell script that ran a bunch of tests, gathered data about the system > and then created an archive that would then be uploaded to a website which > created graphs. Dreaming maybe but it would be consistent. So what goes in our > testset? > > Just a generic list, add to or take away form it.. > > * phoronix test suite ? > * > * iozone > * kernbench > * dbench > * bonnie++ > * iperf > * nbench > > The phoronix test suite has most tests in it in addition to many many others. > Maybe a subset of those tests with the aim of testing Virtualization would be > good? > > Grant McWilliams +1 for the Phoronix test suite. I was going to suggest it too. http://phoronix-test-suite.com/ It can publish stats to a central server which the phoronix folks maintain, and it records the details of the server on which the test was performed. Not sure if it's smart enough to detect a VM though. My experience with it has been limited so far but generally positive. This isn't my data, but I think it's a good example of how pts can be used to compare results from different tests and scenarios. http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/?k=profile&u=justapost-29384-19429-181 61 Regards, Kelvin