Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 13:51:08 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>, arch@freebsd.org, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fine grain select locking. Message-ID: <20070729175108.GA85196@rot26.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20070704170522.GB53564@in-addr.com> References: <20070702230728.E552@10.0.0.1> <20070703181242.T552@10.0.0.1> <20070704105525.GU45894@elvis.mu.org> <20070704124833.W37059@fledge.watson.org> <3bbf2fe10707040800p4e003df0p65e2b802f81ec51e@mail.gmail.com> <20070704174511.C67251@fledge.watson.org> <20070704170522.GB53564@in-addr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 01:05:22PM -0400, Gary Palmer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 05:46:34PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > > > > On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Attilio Rao wrote: > > > > >2007/7/4, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>: > > >>There seem to be two parts of owning a benchmark: > > >> > > >>- Establishing baselines over time -- how doe FreeBSD 4.8, 5.5, 6.0, 6.1, > > >>6.2, > > >> 6-STABLE weekly, 7-CURRENT weekly, and maybe a Linux or NetBSD version > > >> perform for the workload using otherwise identical configuration. > > >> > > >>- Measurement and feedback -- identifying bottlenecks, working with > > >>developers > > >> to measure the results of specific optimizations, etc, across the life > > >>cycle > > >> of the patch. > > > > > >Another problem here would be about the hardware availabilty (obviously > > >I'm speaking about scalability improvements). Until now, tests have been > > >done mainly on amd64 machines provided by Kris and Jeff, IIRC. Having a > > >wider range of targets would help a lot in these cases. > > > > The FreeBSD Foundation is currently working on updating the Netperf test > > cluster from dual-cpu HTT boxes to 8-core systems, and from 1gbps to 10gbps > > ethernet. Hopefully this will improve access to larger multicore systems > > for developers without local hardware. This project has been "in progress" > > for a while now, but will wrap up soon. > > Hi Robert, > > Another way of looking at Attilio's message is that we need to focus on > more than one type of platform. In addition to benchmarking any differences > between large 8 core Opteron and Xeon systems and the Sun "CoolThreads" > platform, we need to maintain scalability on "more affordable" single > core hardware as well. An immediate thought is embedded type systems > such as the Soekris. While high-end server farms have always been our > bread and butter, I think widening our focus might be worthwhile. I might > have missed it, but I don't remember results being published to ensure > that while SMP systems gain performance that we don't adversely impact > UP systems in the process. (My memory is far from perfect, apologies if > I'm wrong) I do keep a close eye on UP performance on "my" benchmark targets, and you will be pleased to know that the same optimizations that have such a big effect on SMP systems often also have a positive effect on UP systems, and do not regress performance in the other cases. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070729175108.GA85196>