Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:11:29 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD Message-ID: <fj3jc6$ba2$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <20071204123116.G87930@fledge.watson.org> References: <20071201213732.GA16638@cannabis.dataforce.net> <1497741406.20071201230441@rulez.sk> <20071202174540.GA29572@cannabis.dataforce.net> <200712020844.49718.linimon@FreeBSD.org> <4753C9E4.1060200@chistydom.ru> <20071203114037.G79674@fledge.watson.org> <47542372.3040303@chistydom.ru> <20071203163353.J79674@fledge.watson.org> <47551C1C.3000903@chistydom.ru> <47553170.90409@bulinfo.net> <20071204121329.N87930@fledge.watson.org> <47554773.2080806@bulinfo.net> <20071204123116.G87930@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigF2AEC59CF746B56F83EA1C83 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Robert Watson wrote: > Changing > locking primitives, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is a risky thing= : > after all, it intentionally changes the timing for critical kernel data= > structures in the file system code. I've given Stephan, the author of > the patch, a ping to ask him about this, but late in a release cycle, > conservativism is the watch-word. Agreed, but it would be a shame to miss on the momentum 7.0 has acquired for performance. Web servers are so common that there's a huge chance one of the first thing people will do with 7.0 would be some kind of web-benchmarks, especially after this thread on stable@. Though (as I read the thread) the patch won't bring FreeBSD in line with Linux, it will help it not to be so slow it's silly. Re: timings: Would looking at past instances give insight into future? I don't remember the time accurately, but in the past, when VFS was translated to MPSAFE and the locking reengineered, were there such proble= ms? Maybe Peter Holm can run a week or so of constant stress testing (24-hours-a-day) with the patch to verify it at least in short term? --------------enigF2AEC59CF746B56F83EA1C83 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHVVIJldnAQVacBcgRApEWAJ9jwrsWfsXmxAI/UqXCaZohKm0N+wCdGikZ SXaObFkNak6q++pqvWBAOwo= =VYYi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigF2AEC59CF746B56F83EA1C83--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fj3jc6$ba2$1>