Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:08:39 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: Florian Smeets <flo@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r228424 - in head/sys: kern sys Message-ID: <CAF-QHFW_sM7=euOtAUrJpn6e4k1MpWyiD_7Az%2B=SJenm5DLdpQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F1DE4FF.3080606@FreeBSD.org> References: <201112112102.pBBL21kB068967@svn.freebsd.org> <4F1DE4FF.3080606@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23 January 2012 23:53, Florian Smeets <flo@freebsd.org> wrote: > which creates a database work set of ~1.5GB. Max throughput was achieved > at 20 Clients. > At 40 threads the results varied between 43000 - 76500 across reboots. > Attilio suspects that this can be caused by the kernel memory layout > changing under the woods creating cache effects difficult to control, > therefor the scaling factor was reduced to 10 (~150MB work set) and the > numbers got deterministic across reboot. Or possibly NUMA? Though 40 processes and 1.5 GB seem too low for NUMA effects to be so noticable... Was the round-robin allocator talked about in here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2011-October/036525.html ever actually committed? I seem to remember some other thread which said it wasn't yet but can't find it now, and I also cannot find the commit. AFAIK the current state of NUMA is still described in http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/210550
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF-QHFW_sM7=euOtAUrJpn6e4k1MpWyiD_7Az%2B=SJenm5DLdpQ>