Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:35:43 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FILEDESC_LOCK() implementation Message-ID: <20060621183543.GC82074@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <20060612054115.GA42379@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060612054115.GA42379@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote this message on Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:41 -0400:
> I fixed mutex profiling to a) not be as wrong and b) not suck so very
> much, and here is a revised profiling trace from mysql supersmack on a
> 12 cpu E4500, sorted by ratio of cnt_lock/count; filedesc lock
> contention (via FILEDESC_[UN]LOCK()) is the major mutex contention
> problem.
Should we also look at breaking down filedesc lock to have multiple
locks over the range? I am thinking of writing a program that will
have 32 threads (sun4v) and all threads will be doing heavy i/o, and
will be even more heavily contested on FILEDESC than the supersmack
benchmark would be...
Though this doesn't solve the problem of all 32 threads trying to do
i/o on a fd in the same block though...
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060621183543.GC82074>