From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Nov 22 20:57:05 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E82516A421;
	Thu, 22 Nov 2007 20:57:05 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from weak.local (pointyhat.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::2b])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79EB913C442;
	Thu, 22 Nov 2007 20:57:04 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <4745ED27.6060401@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 21:57:11 +0100
From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
References: <4741905E.8050300@chistydom.ru>	<4742ADFE.40902@FreeBSD.org>	<4742C46A.1060701@chistydom.ru>	<47432F77.3030606@FreeBSD.org>	<474339E9.4080301@FreeBSD.org>	<4743629B.9090408@FreeBSD.org>	<fi11k8$5ak$1@ger.gmane.org>	<47440C10.5060608@FreeBSD.org>	<fi12dg$7u7$1@ger.gmane.org>	<47440E55.3060909@FreeBSD.org>	<9bbcef730711210320s73c0625bh25ba2561b270f237@mail.gmail.com>	<47448CC2.7030100@FreeBSD.org>
	<fi43da$kc8$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <fi43da$kc8$1@ger.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 20:57:05 -0000

Ivan Voras wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
>> Ivan Voras wrote:
>>> On 21/11/2007, Kris Kennaway <kris@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> Ivan Voras wrote:
>>>>> Yes, but I had to verify it anyway :)
>>>> You haven't verified anything until you look at how much work the system
>>>> is doing, before and after.
>>> I have, and it's roughly the same (50 +/- 2 queries/s).
>>>
>>> (meaning that I'm not interested in exact statistics here, but in
>>> order-of-magnitude changes, which didn't happen).
>> OK, let's take a step back here.  Did you obtain the lock profiling
>> trace and verify that you're seeing the same problem as Alexey?  Can I
>> see the trace?
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> http://ivoras.sharanet.org/stuff/lock_profile.txt
> 
> This is without your patch.
> 
> There's a lot of ZFS locks in there, but it seems lockmgr:ufs and
> lockmgr:zfs have the largest records:
> 
> 299117621   1474776121       148663     1042821  1414     0          513
>          440 /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c:2035 (lockmgr:ufs)
> 
> 117958368    847566147       182093        2676 316728    68
> 948          374 /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c:515 (lockmgr:zfs)
> 
> Which is surprising since all the working-set file systems are on ZFS,
> only the root and /tmp are on UFS. /tmp also holds sockets for the
> databases.
> 
> Your reading of the lock profile will be appreciated.

OK, how about with?

Kris