Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:05:51 -0700 From: JG <amd64list@jpgsworld.com> To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is MySQL nearly twice as fast on Linux/AMD64 Vs. FreeBSD/AMD64? Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20040518170424.03c42748@mail.ojoink.com> In-Reply-To: <200405181359.18291.peter@wemm.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040518103357.04c6cbb8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040518103357.04c6cbb8@mail.ojoink.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:59 PM 5/18/2004 -0700, you wrote: >On Tuesday 18 May 2004 10:36 am, JG wrote: > > > MySQL Statically compiled with libc_r > ^^^^^ >That's your killer. You're using the the single-process polling loop >based threads and comparing it to linux's parallel process based >threads. The moment one thread blocks on disk IO, everything stops. > >You want -lpthread instead, but this isn't going to be happy on >5.2.1-RELEASE. I've fixed a lot of bugs in 5-current that would mean >the difference between it working versus crashing. > >Also, there are patches to change MySQL to use PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS >threads with -lpthread. This works out a little better on benchmarks >since it can make better use of the ligher weight context switches. > >-- >Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com >"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 Yes I'll definitely try this next. Thanks to everyone for all the tips & suggestions. I'll post some updated results tomorrow sometime.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.2.0.9.2.20040518170424.03c42748>