From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 22 15:45:29 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9EB16A4CA for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:45:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kreios@gmail.com) Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.203]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA8D43D78 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:43:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kreios@gmail.com) Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id i11so140218nzh for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 07:44:09 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=T0tTyxZeZYSYJKyx2jN7Kmd5JIRzzyq1pY4NeJSdMNl6aucCThWcaTnQKQlsSowCQJF4wMbnWbL0512hiTKo4iwMqk6T+7AOcyR5ZaRliE/NRjleX917cWGmmHDi2Bbkxn4G2/Uf+pq1gpPlKFtBlY2mKJBmHOO0+GyAhRfuwRQ= Received: by 10.65.154.10 with SMTP id g10mr12684726qbo.1164210249495; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 07:44:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.198? ( [71.113.235.243]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e19sm14043405qbe.2006.11.22.07.44.08; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 07:44:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <455F1021.6040004@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <20061030192702.GG76994@registro.br> <20061111091844.I63959@fledge.watson.org> <20061116164053.GR57732@registro.br> <455F1021.6040004@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <77EFE6C7-96D4-4509-AC03-63F1AAE9BBA4@gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Dave Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:44:05 -0600 To: O. Hartmann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Marcelo Gardini do Amaral , Robert Watson Subject: Re: DNS Performance Numbers 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: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:45:29 -0000 On Nov 18, 2006, at 7:52 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: > Marcelo Gardini do Amaral wrote: >>> FYI: In response to feedback from ISC, there are UDP transmit >>> optimizations >>> in FreeBSD 7.x. These have a relatively minor performance impact >>> for >>> single-threaded applications, but in the special case of BIND >>> accessing a >>> single UDP socket from many different threads, it significantly >>> improves >>> performance. I'll look at MFC'ing these to 6.x after 6.2-RELEASE >>> (especially if reminded in a month or so :-). >>> >>> With regard to the possible bge issue -- I would encourage you to >>> test >>> using a 7.x kernel, ideally with all the debugging disabled, and >>> see if >>> there's been any improvement (or regression). There has been a >>> lot of >>> change in these areas, and it would be helpful to know what, if >>> any, impact >>> this has had. >>> >> >> >> I made some tests using 7.x with all the debugging disabled: >> >> queries / s >> >> Int bind (d_t) bind (e_t) nsd (1_s) nsd (2_s) >> --- ---------- ---------- --------- --------- >> >> bge 15439 14733 12910 10946 >> em 37655 34092 42411 41974 >> >> >> d_t: disable threads >> e_t: enable threads (libpthread) >> 1_s: 1 server forked >> 2_s: 2 server forked >> >> Bind: 9.2.3 >> NSD: 3.0.2 >> em: Dell 1950, Intel NIC, SMP kernel >> bge: HP Blade BL35p, Broadcom NIC, SMP kernel >> Client: Dell 1750, Intel NIC, FreeBSD 4.11 UP, running queryperf >> >> >> >> The results are very good for em NIC, better than my numbers [1] with >> FreeBSD 6.1 some months ago. So I guess that we had an >> improvement :-) >> >> But I got the same poor performance with the bge interface. The >> problem remains. >> >> [1] http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2006-September/ >> 011767.html >> >> Cheers, >> Marcelo >> >> > > > These results looks very puzzling to me. > As far as I know, multithreading and/or multiprocessors should perform > better anyway than a single threaded application within other > applications on an UP box. Strange results ...And more strange than > this > is the result taken from the FBSD 4.11 box! Is there an explanation > why > FreeBSD performs so bad beyond 4.X and on SMP boxes? Please show me > threads ... > > Thanks and regards, > Oliver The FreeBSD pthread library and BIND don't work well together. If you use the libthr library, performance goes up. -- Dave