Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:28:23 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Krassimir Slavchev <krassi@bulinfo.net> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance! Message-ID: <47867FE7.70403@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4785D308.2080903@bulinfo.net> References: <476A5EE1.9000003@bulinfo.net> <476FF662.6050604@FreeBSD.org> <477BB7C0.3060603@bulinfo.net> <477C1FA3.2070904@FreeBSD.org> <477CC7DC.6060801@bulinfo.net> <47840D21.6060807@FreeBSD.org> <47847681.9040304@bulinfo.net> <478479CA.7070000@FreeBSD.org> <4784A4B0.5070403@bulinfo.net> <4784A817.2080305@FreeBSD.org> <4784C0B1.3060108@bulinfo.net> <47851797.8050200@FreeBSD.org> <4785D308.2080903@bulinfo.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Krassimir Slavchev wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Kris Kennaway wrote: >> Krassimir Slavchev wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Kris Kennaway wrote: >>>> Krassimir Slavchev wrote: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Here are lock profiling results with select patch applied. >>>> OK, you are doing I/O over TCP. Are you sure you are using TCP on both >>>> systems? Linux may not be defaulting to TCP transport for local >>>> queries. >>>> >>>> Add --pgsql-host="" to your sysbench command line to make it communicate >>>> over a local domain socket, which is much more efficient. >>>> >>>> Kris >>>> >>> Hmm, Yes linux uses local domain sockets! >>> Here are results using local domain sockets on FreeBSD too: >>> #threads #tranzactions/sec >>> 1 728 >>> 5 2996 >>> 10 5301 >>> 20 3931 >>> 40 2466 >>> 60 1852 >>> 80 1424 >>> 100 1216 >>> >>> Just to remember: >>> Linux (2.6.18) >>> #threads #transactions/sec >>> 1 693 >>> 5 3539 >>> 10 5789 >>> 20 5791 >>> 40 5661 >>> 60 5517 >>> 80 5401 >>> 100 5319 >>> >>> I have results using Fedora 8 on the same hardware: >>> Linux (2.6.23) >>> #threads #transactions/sec >>> 1 740 >>> 5 2675 >>> 10 6486 >>> 20 6893 >>> 40 6623 >>> 60 6623 >>> 80 6522 >>> 100 6417 >>> >>> If we look at the results with up to 10 threads the performance of >>> FreeBSD is very good. >>> May be something can be tuned for number of threads > number of CPUs? >>> >>> Are you interested in lock profiling statistics with more threads than >>> the number of CPUs? >> Yes, it's still performing anomalously. Glad we're making progress >> though :) >> >> Kris >> > > Okay, but how many threads will be more useful to test with? Let's start with 8 and say 40. The two problems seem to be slightly lower peak and poor scaling above peak. They might be the same, or they might be different. krishome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47867FE7.70403>