From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 3 13:22:04 2008 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 266D7106564A for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 13:22:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: from blah.sun-fish.com (blah.sun-fish.com [217.18.249.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E128FC21 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 13:22:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 40E331B10F17; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:22:02 +0200 (CEST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on blah.cmotd.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.6 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 Received: from hater.haters.org (hater.cmotd.com [192.168.3.125]) by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146781B10EBB; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:21:55 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <47F4D9F2.9070200@moneybookers.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:21:54 +0300 From: Stefan Lambrev User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Attila Nagy References: <475B0F3E.5070100@fsn.hu> <479DFE74.8030004@fsn.hu> <479F02A7.9020607@fsn.hu> <47F4D0DD.2040809@fsn.hu> In-Reply-To: <47F4D0DD.2040809@fsn.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/6566/Thu Apr 3 13:34:30 2008 on blah.cmotd.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: =?UTF-8?B?6YGU5ZOJ?= , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, =?UTF-8?B?SklOTUVJIFRhdHV5YSAvIOelnuaYjg==?=, bind-users@isc.org Subject: Re: Bad bind performance with FreeBSD 7 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: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:22:04 -0000 Greetings, Attila Nagy wrote: > On 01/29/08 11:40, Attila Nagy wrote: >> ps: I have an other problem. I've recently switched from a last year >> 6-STABLE to 7-STABLE and got pretty bad results on the same machine >> with the same bind (9.4). >> The graphs are here: >> http://picasaweb.google.com/nagy.attila/20080129Fbsd6vs7Bind > The problem still persists and now I can provide some profiling info, > made by HWPMC. > > Sorry if you already answer this question, but at least I can find it in the thread. What scheduler are you using on RELENG_7 ? Did you check with both schedulers (ule/4bsd) to see which one works better for you? Also are you sure that you service the same number of requests - I see that the 6.x image shows CPU usage from Aug 2007 and 7.x image is from Jan 2008 ... is it possible, that you have more requests and that's why your CPU usage increased? -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177