From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 9 23:46:45 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD9016A4CE for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 23:46:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79CCE43D39 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 23:46:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.254.12] (g4.samsco.home [192.168.254.12]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j19NjUO5012448; Wed, 9 Feb 2005 16:45:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <420AA08C.8090809@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 16:45:16 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: noackjr@alumni.rice.edu References: <20050209205943.34c39e15.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> <420A9DFD.40805@alumni.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <420A9DFD.40805@alumni.rice.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MySQL benchmarks X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 23:46:46 -0000 Jon Noack wrote: > On 02/09/05 13:59, Miguel Mendez wrote: > >> Someone has posted a link to a newsforge article on the NetBSD lists >> that benchmarks MySQL performance on several systems, you can see it at: >> >> http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=04/12/27/1243207&from=rss >> >> I don't know how much Linux-specific code there is in MySQL because, >> honestly, I always try to avoid it and go with PostgreSQL, but perhaps >> somebody with more MySQL-fu can fill in the blanks and confirm that the >> better performance seen on Linux systems is due to how the software is >> designed and not so much related to FreeBSD per se. > > > The scalability results look promising. Also, has anyone seen what > effect WITH_PROC_SCOPE_PTH has on performance? > > Jon It's a mixed bag that has been in significant flux over the past 8 months due to threading and scheduling infrastructure sometimes fixing bugs and sometimes introducing new bugs. On the mysql SuperSmack test, the best results I found on a dual 3GHz Xeon were with system scope threads under libpthread. libthr was a close second (though all threads there are process scope by definition) and process scope libpthread was almost as bad as libc_r. However, that was back in August, and I think that much has changed since then. Other, non-mysql tests that I've run recently have shown that process scope libpthread is now the overall winner. It would be nice to come up with a new matrix of results based on scheduler, preemption, thread library, and thread attributes. Now if only I had the 2 days free to do that... Scott