Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:24:06 +0300 From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> To: Mike Makonnen <mtm@identd.net> Cc: threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD5.3-RC1 MySQL Performance Message-ID: <41795E56.60603@he.iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <20041022152103.GA4743@rogue.acs.lan> References: <000901c4b7b4$2113ab70$45fea8c0@turbofresse> <41782BDF.8040301@he.iki.fi> <20041022152103.GA4743@rogue.acs.lan>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Mike Makonnen wrote: >On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 12:36:31AM +0300, Petri Helenius wrote: > > >>jesk wrote: >> >> >> >>>the benchmark is executing 1000 sql-select queries*10 concurrent clients on >>>a 90k row table with a random not really high cacheable where-statement on >>>the index: >>>---- >>>15985 queries per second >>>(pthreads without process scope threads, sched_4bsd and preemption) >>>6139 queries per second >>>(pthreads with process scope threads, sched_4bsd and preemption) >>>10779 queries per second >>>(linuxthreads, sched_4bsd and preemption) >>>fedora result: >>>11900 queries per second >>>---- >>> >>> >>>maybe someone got some hints for improvement of this situation... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>Do you have any idea why process scope threads are faster than system >>scope threads? My gut feeling is that it should be exactly opposite. >> >> > >I think you're reading it wrong: 'pthreads without process scope threads' > ^^^^^^^ >gets 15985 qps whereas 'with process scope threads' it only gets 6139 qps. > > Yes. I meant to ask why system scope threads are faster than process scope threads. They should be the other way around. Petehelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41795E56.60603>