From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 24 17:27:12 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFDB0106566C for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:27:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: from albert.catwhisker.org (adsl-63-193-123-122.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.193.123.122]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F2F8FC13 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:27:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@catwhisker.org) Received: from albert.catwhisker.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by albert.catwhisker.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n3OGoCcC004763 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:50:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@albert.catwhisker.org) Received: (from david@localhost) by albert.catwhisker.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n3OGoCXm004762 for performance@freebsd.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:50:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david) Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 09:50:12 -0700 From: David Wolfskill To: performance@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20090424165012.GB1387@albert.catwhisker.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7iMSBzlTiPOCCT2k" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Subject: Presentation of performance data & analysis? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:27:13 -0000 --7iMSBzlTiPOCCT2k Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I apologize, as this is a bit tangential to the description of the list. I've been doing some measurements of workloads of interest (in my case, the workload is building some software, and the metric of greatest interest is "elapsed time" (which I obtain via /usr/bin/time)). And I've been using phk's ministat (/usr/src/tools/tools/ministat, for any who aren't aware of it). It is quite useful (so yeah, I owe phk a beer), but I'm trying to figure out how to present results to management-types. While I don't have any PHBs in my direct management chain, I've seen some PHB tendencies in the management of the folks I'm supporting. And I get the message that "complicated" won't ccommunicate to them. Nor will "nuanced." Even a pointer to some examples of approaches that seem to work well for this sort of thing would help a great deal -- my training hasn't exactly been in statistical analysis or in presentation of data. :-} I'll be happy to summarize responses that are not sent to the list (unless you'd rather I didn't, of course). Thanks. Peace, david --=20 David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org Depriving a girl or boy of an opportunity for education is evil. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. --7iMSBzlTiPOCCT2k Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAknx7cMACgkQmprOCmdXAD3xjgCdFGmeEZ6+G774SNClBXf7fv7i lv8AnjxKpuq0mPGvPmgG/0nifdknFxUf =y2F2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7iMSBzlTiPOCCT2k-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 24 18:09:57 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5520F1065697 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:09:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31DF8FC0A for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:09:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LxPqT-0000qC-TU for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:09:53 +0000 Received: from 78-1-171-208.adsl.net.t-com.hr ([78.1.171.208]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:09:53 +0000 Received: from ivoras by 78-1-171-208.adsl.net.t-com.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:09:53 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:09:24 +0200 Lines: 47 Message-ID: References: <20090424165012.GB1387@albert.catwhisker.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigF33E24CDAEA85821262762A7" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 78-1-171-208.adsl.net.t-com.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: <20090424165012.GB1387@albert.catwhisker.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Sender: news Subject: Re: Presentation of performance data & analysis? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:09:57 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigF33E24CDAEA85821262762A7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David Wolfskill wrote: > I apologize, as this is a bit tangential to the description of the list= =2E >=20 > I've been doing some measurements of workloads of interest (in my case,= > the workload is building some software, and the metric of greatest > interest is "elapsed time" (which I obtain via /usr/bin/time)). >=20 > And I've been using phk's ministat (/usr/src/tools/tools/ministat, for > any who aren't aware of it). It is quite useful (so yeah, I owe phk a > beer), but I'm trying to figure out how to present results to > management-types. Um, I may be missing your point but what is wrong with putting the text "55 bogons per second difference" in large bold letters centered on the page and "with 95% probability" in small plain letters, as a footnote? They probably wouldn't have use for the statistical graph even if they knew how to parse it, so you might as well put it in in the background and assign 90% transparency on it, to serve as eye candy only. --------------enigF33E24CDAEA85821262762A7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAknyAFQACgkQldnAQVacBciGFgCfVYzmCbQL178yTGor2XILS/ED S20AnApmJg3w5diKLjIfJb7QodslHJDw =qmxs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigF33E24CDAEA85821262762A7-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 24 18:58:02 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D36CF106564A for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:58:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from asmtpout017.mac.com (asmtpout017.mac.com [17.148.16.92]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C02E68FC15 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:58:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Received: from cswiger1.apple.com ([17.227.140.124]) by asmtp017.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-8.01 (built Dec 16 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0KIM00KDZ9W2IY90@asmtp017.mac.com> for performance@freebsd.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:57:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <60B82B59-50EF-475B-8F5A-D233F2C06FD8@mac.com> From: Chuck Swiger To: David Wolfskill In-reply-to: <20090424165012.GB1387@albert.catwhisker.org> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:57:38 -0700 References: <20090424165012.GB1387@albert.catwhisker.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Cc: performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Presentation of performance data & analysis? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:58:03 -0000 Hi, David-- On Apr 24, 2009, at 9:50 AM, David Wolfskill wrote: > While I don't have any PHBs in my direct management chain, I've seen > some PHB tendencies in the management of the folks I'm supporting. > And > I get the message that "complicated" won't ccommunicate to them. Nor > will "nuanced." > > Even a pointer to some examples of approaches that seem to work well > for this sort of thing would help a great deal -- my training hasn't > exactly been in statistical analysis or in presentation of data. :-} Presentation to PHBs and statistical analysis are remarkably different skills. Save the latter for an appendix or footnotes, so the engineering types have some confidence that you've actually done some work in testing and your results are likely to be sane, if/when the PHBs for the client ask their local tech gurus about it afterwards. For the "presentation to PHBs" part, it's simple: start with an intro that briefly mentions what you want to talk about and why they should care, typically, how much money can they save if they make the change (or how much more can they make, depending, etc). The most direct example I can recall of this was from a professor of human-computer interaction (HCI), who was studying things like supermarket checkout line scanners and telephone operator systems. It turns out that if you pre-record the initial greeting, ie, where you dial 0 and the operator says "Hello, this is AT&T [or whomever], how may I help you?" so that the operator can focus on the type of incoming call (ie, residential line operator request, pay phone, fire/ police/emergency, jail/prison calls, etc) instead of speaking a rote response, this saves a few (about 3 seconds) per call in processing. At the time this study was done (1990ish), that represented on the order of $50 million dollars per year savings to the phone company. Then go into more details such as what the change would entail, what benefits should occur, what tradeoffs might apply, any caveats, and then summarize with a repeat of the core idea and cost/benefit or savings they get for the conclusion. If this sounds to you like the way the classic 5-paragraph essay works (ie, paragraph 1: intro, tell them what you're saying, paragraphs 2-4: three points, paragraph 5: conclusion, where you tell them again what you've just said :), well, you're getting the idea.... Regards, -- -Chuck From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 24 23:08:41 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B5E10656BE; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:08:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kuan.joe@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f171.google.com (mail-ew0-f171.google.com [209.85.219.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 342338FC27; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:08:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kuan.joe@gmail.com) Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so1204593ewy.43 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:08:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=u1szUVa5rF/H/pUECQrWOt2PZkNVp/fOqITj2q/zV/I=; b=TVAnaft2rHl/N5FZgxOUHXOQDQXg/E4RpIc4cv8kdcC4BAuavOMK0y4aw8KE4W+RxZ YygPws3VZNpUiE2OsgSMrt4zPt0/wt20n+8Gv6r1epx+cmgKkk/57hrgs2o4PjjvXH+t RC66Z6GV37GJhf4Z4BrBJl6eH4OjOzp895lKI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=lRwk9cpn7EEDMNqld2EtgyJLjmLGDwFSuH6pwqXBL9SYRWwzWrOMjv/UJGwGs/8krU fu8aO0nT5P+c/wrEtvqwQvXlqCrMhiP8NoO+Msed4Xi9myuczAQ+ytYl3wa0WxAMeleG 1NsJ1Ze+14P1EhkwIg1XBkKLc2XSQeSihcJ+A= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.54.198 with SMTP id i48mr220673wec.144.1240612925520; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:42:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:42:05 +0100 Message-ID: <40bb871a0904241542o3f4d6c6ap62ff71876074bbea@mail.gmail.com> From: Joseph Kuan To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:36:10 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: FreeBSD 7.1 taskq em performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:08:41 -0000 Hi all, I have been hitting some barrier with FreeBSD 7.1 network performance. I have written an application which contains two kernel threads that takes mbufs directly from a network interface and forwards to another network interface. This idea is to simulate different network environment. I have been using FreeBSD 6.4 amd64 and tested with an Ixia box (specialised hardware firing very high packet rate). The PC was a Core2 2.6 GHz with dual ports Intel PCIE Gigabit network card. It can manage up to 1.2 million pps. I have a higher spec PC with FreeBSD 7.1 amd64 and Quadcore 2.3 GHz and PCIE Gigabit network card. The performance can only achieve up to 600k pps. I notice the 'taskq em0' and 'taskq em1' is solid 100% CPU but it is not in FreeBSD 6.4. Any advice? Many thanks in advance Joe