From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 4 13:51:12 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FC5916A4CE; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 13:51:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from multiplay.co.uk (www1.multiplay.co.uk [212.42.16.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D04043D39; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 13:51:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from vader ([212.135.219.179]) by multiplay.co.uk (multiplay.co.uk [212.42.16.7]) (MDaemon.PRO.v7.1.0.R) with ESMTP id md50000263316.msg; Fri, 04 Jun 2004 21:48:12 +0100 Message-ID: <011301c44a75$8d7ee830$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> From: "Steven Hartland" To: "Robert Watson" References: Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 21:50:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Fri, 04 Jun 2004 21:48:12 +0100 (not processed: message from valid local sender) X-MDRemoteIP: 212.135.219.179 X-Return-Path: killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDAV-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Fri, 04 Jun 2004 21:48:14 +0100 cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: Ali Niknam Subject: Re: FreeBSD 5.2.1: Mutex/Spinlock starvation? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 20:51:12 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Watson" > Well, I know a bit about the general conditions -- situations where > mutexes are held for short periods of time, rather than over long > transactions. I know from experience that adaptive mutexes can make an > observable difference for system builds and IPC activities. > > To what extent do you have systems where you can reproduce your production > load without impacting production quality? I may have some interesting > patches for you to try running with, if so :-). Got two online Dev boxes I can play with, remote console backup etc so would defo be willing to give them a shot and we run full performance stats on all the machines so that would help determine any gain. As you would expect a game server is constantly doing net IO small amounts of disk IO and quite a chunk of logic processing. The other thing of note is virtually all gameservers run via the linux BC layer as game dev's dont generally have a native port for FreeBSD. I'm also currently benchmarking a dual opteron across a number of OS's any changes you have could also be tested on that bed vs 5.2.1-RELEASE along with the rest. Steve ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.