Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:14:40 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Eirik ?verby <ltning@anduin.net> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Reduced java/tomcat performance 6-beta3 -> 6-stable ? Message-ID: <20051128211440.GB28963@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <02757598-222D-408E-8B33-C2EE1E6E426E@anduin.net> References: <93F6B911-8C64-4F5C-81F9-80EC271ED298@anduin.net> <84dead720511280545v2bc0bc35jd107da06b9a788cb@mail.gmail.com> <20187843-76FC-4EAB-AFF8-7493FB0C0077@anduin.net> <84dead720511280654j138635abgcb9cc0978e6c26b7@mail.gmail.com> <02757598-222D-408E-8B33-C2EE1E6E426E@anduin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 09:54:30PM +0100, Eirik ?verby wrote: > Hi, > > I think I have found the culprit. There must be some sort of > difference between the machines after all (BIOS revision?), because > while on one machine the interrupt rate for the bge card stays very > low (2 to be exact) during maximum load, the other machine goes > beyond 1000 and keeps rising constantly. This might also explain why > performance slowly degrades over time on that machine, and response > times vary wildly, while the "fast" machine responds nicely within > 1-2 seconds no matter the load and testing time. > > I will have to investigate this more closely. Is there a way to force > the NIC to polling mode (I'm assuming that is the difference, an IRQ > rate of 2 is too low for a heavily loaded server if the NIC is > interrupt-driven)? > > Anything else I could look at? BIOS update. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDi3NAWry0BWjoQKURAhf0AJ0eom+7CQoHFy/SLzGSuG3E0CErxACfe/+V BI/55LctOdXE/9BS0us4KAo= =3MQQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051128211440.GB28963>