From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 16 13:27:52 2007 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 0E9EA16A403; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:27:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcelo@registro.br) Received: from clone.registro.br (clone.registro.br [200.160.2.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC57713C459; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:27:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marcelo@registro.br) Received: by clone.registro.br (Postfix, from userid 1014) id B0749B83A; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:27:50 -0300 (BRT) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:27:50 -0300 From: Marcelo Gardini do Amaral To: Robert Watson Message-ID: <20070316132750.GK82003@registro.br> References: <20070315213731.GI82003@registro.br> <20070316122605.G7579@fledge.watson.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070316122605.G7579@fledge.watson.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Peter_Losher@isc.org, jad@nominet.org.uk Subject: Re: MFC of UDP socket performance test 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: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:27:52 -0000 On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 12:27:24PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Marcelo Gardini do Amaral wrote: > > >I repeated that performance test done with bind [1] using now Robert's MFC > >[2]. Another tweak that I was supposed to do was to use libthr instead of > >libpthread (via libmap.conf) and build bind with threads option. In the > >new test I did this. > > > >I used the same methodology, same zone file and same server hardware that > >I used in [3]. > > Whether this patch improves performance or not will depend on the nature of > the workload and hardware configuration. It will only help on CPU-bound > multiprocessor systems, which probably describes top level domain name > servers well, but may describe less loaded systems less well. I'm not sure > what configuration Jinmei was using specifically in his testing and > evaluation; since Jinmei is about to become a FreeBSD developer, hopefully > we can get him involved further in this conversation. Great. I will repeat the test with a larger zone, like a top level domain name. If I see improvement with the patch, I will let you know guys. -- Att., Marcelo Gardini NIC .br