Re: Performance!

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.

kris

_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages