Portable, so that comparisons are possible with your main competitors (even if they are your own previous releases).Nothing is more frustrating than a complex benchmark that delivers a single number, leaving the developer with no additional information as to where the problem might lie. Observable, so if poor performance is seen, the developer has a place to start looking.Repeatable, so experiments of comparison can be conducted relatively easily and with a reasonable degree of precision.In the “Performance Anti-Patterns” article, there are some highlighted points to determine, in this case, what for and how benchmarks should be run. In such white paper can be seen statements about benchmarks should explain what is about to be tested and why, and also they should do (or ease) a kind of analysis of the expected system performance. We found that most popular benchmarks are flawed and many research papers do not provide a clear indication of true performance. In this article we survey 415 file system and storage benchmarks from 106 recent papers. The white paper “A Nine Year Study of File System and Storage Benchmarking” summarizes this: Surprisingly, correctly doing benchmarks is something really difficult, because there are many possibilities to bring bad or misleading results and to omit things. So is responsibility of the customer to determine how the result will be applied in its productive environment. A benchmark program will never be able to reflect the so-called real-world experience just will reflect how well such program runs in the intended computer. Yet many organizations seem to buy hardware based on benchmarks rather than understand their workloads and buy hardware based on their requirements and, of course, budget.” (Newman, 2015) This explains why the customer needs to know exactly what is meant to be measured. Sadly, many industry benchmarks are gamed. Now, “having an industry standard benchmark is always a good thing, if the benchmarks are not gamed. The benhmarker can take advantage of the limits to confront, like system resources, virtual software environment, applications, processing load simulation, user load simulation, and system use simulation, among others and do whatever is needed to surpass such limits and give a questionable result. Benchmark programs try to analyze the “performance” of a computer based in a well-defined test bed (normally not even close as the final configuration of the computer).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |