From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 8 14:19:21 2003 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 7000016A4BF for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 14:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8222243FBF for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 14:19:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19wTQC-0002uF-00 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:19:40 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from sea.gmane.org ([80.91.224.252]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19wTQB-0002u7-00 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:19:39 +0200 Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19wTPo-0005WD-00 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:19:16 +0200 From: Jesse Guardiani Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:19:15 -0400 Organization: WingNET Lines: 52 Message-ID: References: <000901c37628$d683ff10$6ba55982@gog> <1063042016.cea6637e4e7eb@mailhub.yumyumyum.org> <000d01c37646$1c053f00$6ba55982@gog> <1063053637.db581d2f18d48@mailhub.yumyumyum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 X-Mail-Copies-To: never Sender: news Subject: Re: Benchmarking KSE and SMPng X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: jesse@wingnet.net List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:19:21 -0000 culverk@yumyumyum.org wrote: > Quoting Roderick van Domburg : > >> > Just in case you don't know, there is no 5-STABLE yet. All the 5.x >> Releases have >> > been based on -CURRENT. >> >> Indeed, I stand corrected. >> >> > > Question is then which {application,theoretical} benchmarks to run >> > > under which circumstances. Although I've heard of bonnie et al, I'm >> > > new to the benchmarking business and welcome any suggestions. >> > > >> > Something that might be interesting to try is running mysql with >> > libc_r, linuxthreads, libkse, and libthr, using the included mysql >> > benchmarks that >> come >> > with mysql. I used those benchmarks to test mysql on a few of the >> > machines >> I >> > needed to install it on at one point, and I know mysql utilizes >> > threads. >> Off >> > the top of my head I can't think of anything other than databases that >> > performed badly on FreeBSD before due to threading issues. >> >> How about Apache2 or locked subsystems (I/O and networking spring to >> mind)? >> > Good call. I hadn't thought of that because I've always just used the > preforking mpm in apache. I'm very interested in hearing what you find from your benchmarks. I've been wondering how much better KSE currently is in CURRENT ever since I started running 5.1-RELEASE on my laptop a few months ago. But I don't have the time to do extensive benchmarking, and I don't have a spare machine to run them on. (hey, I need my laptop for work.) I've also heard that 5.x ships with added kernel debugging and such. If that's true, it might be a good idea to turn that off (not sure how.). Also, running similar benchmarks on a 4.8 system would make a good comparison. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net