Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- From: Sven Petai <hadara@xxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 18:18:11 +0300
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 03:42, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 03:34:59AM +0300, Sven Petai wrote:
Hmm, with this patch mysql 4.1 seems to crash at startup. I haven't
yet had time to investigate. Is anyone else seeing this?
Seems to run fine here with 4.1.18 on amd64, but doesn't seem to make
much difference though.
I ran the tests again on the 8 core machine with and without rwatsons
patch and this time with 6 tests for each setting and generated graphs:
http://bsd.ee/~hadara/debug/mysql4/stats.html
thr + select smack dynamics with the patch really do look quite
interesting
PS
I'm currently running testround with rwatsons patch +
http://people.freebsd.org/~csjp/kern_descrip.c.1145074052.diff + mysqld
change davidxu suggested.
Are there any other patches out there that I should try ?
Sorry, I meant
http://people.freebsd.org/~csjp/sys.mpsafe.fileops.1145896495.diff
instead of that patch. Also try turning down HZ to 100, and changing
the wakeup()s to wakeup_one() in sys/filedesc.h.
I preformed additional tests with the settings you suggested,
updated graphs are available @
http://bsd.ee/~hadara/debug/mysql4/stats.html
* with rwatsons patch + mysqld change suggested by davidxu +
http://people.freebsd.org/~csjp/sys.mpsafe.fileops.1145896495.diff
there doesnt seem to be much difference, but in general things seem to be
couple of percent better
mutex profiles for this configuration are available @
with 10 smack threads:
http://bsd.ee/~hadara/debug/mysql4/freebsd_cur_ps2/mutex_freebsd_cur2_p2-select_10_10000.txt
with 100 smack threads:
http://bsd.ee/~hadara/debug/mysql4/freebsd_cur_ps2/mutex_freebsd_cur_p2-select_100_1000.txt
* second run was with same patches, but HZ set to 100
this helps performance a lot but creates large fluxuations in select results
with >20 threads + thr, sometimes difference between 2 runs with same
settings was 10000+ q/s
I'm currently still testing wakeup() -> wakeup_one() suggestion.
In addition I did full testrun on linux to see how much this hardware
is really capable of... graphs for that are available on the stats page too.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- From: Kris Kennaway
- Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- From: Julian Elischer
- Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- References:
- Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- From: Robert Watson
- Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- From: Sven Petai
- Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- From: Kris Kennaway
- Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- Prev by Date: Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- Next by Date: Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- Previous by thread: Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- Next by thread: Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|