From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 12 15:52:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: threads@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5EA116A417; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:52:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from customer-domains.icp-qv1-irony14.iinet.net.au (customer-domains.icp-qv1-irony14.iinet.net.au [203.59.1.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBABE43D6A; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:52:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from 203-59-110-253.dyn.iinet.net.au (HELO [10.1.1.3]) ([203.59.110.253]) by iinet-mail.icp-qv1-irony14.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 12 Nov 2006 23:52:43 +0800 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAErQVkXLO279VWdsb2JhbAANjDYBKw X-IronPort-AV: i="4.09,414,1157299200"; d="scan'208"; a="24117918:sNHT16434684" Message-ID: <4557434C.7080106@elischer.org> Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 07:52:44 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Macintosh/20061025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris References: <20061110151247.GA64530@zone3000.net> <3aaaa3a0611111503m319808cu7e1f710970350044@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a0611111503m319808cu7e1f710970350044@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: threads@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libpthread vs libthr. X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:52:47 -0000 Chris wrote: [...] > > > HI I posted in another thread about how my own experiences seem to > differ from all these benchmarks, they are based on 3 heavily loaded > web/mysql servers. > > One is freebsd 6.1 dual core cpu (not htt). 2nd is dual xeon freebsd > 6.1 and 3rd is another dual xeon freebsd 6.1. > > All 3 of these machines perform better as well as more stable under > higher loads using libpthread process scope. > > System scope appears to make mysql hog the system and everything slows > down except of course mysql. Is this libpthread "system scope" or libthr (which has system scope by default)? > > Libthr appears to make mysql very sporadic with some requests fast > others with a unexplained 5-10 sec delay including timeouts. > > Process scope on libpthread gives me the best results not making mysql > starve the server of resources and it has a consistent response time > of under 2 seconds under heavy loads. this is interesting.. there has been a call to remove "fairness" as a threading property as it complicates the scheduler. It has been said by many that they do not consider this as an important feature and it reduces throughput. > > I cant explain other then it maybe that test mysql data isnt a proper > way to test these threading libraries only real work loads can. > > Chris > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"