From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 26 22:31:50 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6164816A418;
	Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:31:50 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E62213C4D9;
	Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:31:50 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192)
	id 44EAB1A4D7E; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:12:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:12:26 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20071126221226.GJ71382@elvis.mu.org>
References: <200711231232.04447.max@love2party.net>
	<20071126203514.X65286@fledge.watson.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20071126203514.X65286@fledge.watson.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org,
	freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Switch pfil(9) to rmlocks
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:31:50 -0000

* Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> [071126 12:37] wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Max Laier wrote:
> 
> >attached is a diff to switch the pfil(9) subsystem to rmlocks, which are 
> >more suited for the task.  I'd like some exposure before doing the switch, 
> >but I don't expect any fallout.  This email is going through the patched 
> >pfil already - twice.
> 
> FYI, since people are experimenting with rmlocks as a substitute for 
> rwlocks, I played with moving the global rwlock used to protect the name 
> space and linkage of UNIX domain sockets to be an rmlock.  Kris didn't see 
> any measurable change in performance for his MySQL benchmarks, but I 
> figured I'd post the patches as they give a sense of what change impact 
> things like reader state management have on code.  Attached below.  I have 
> no current plans to commit these changes as they appear not to offer 
> benefit (either because the rwlock overhead was negigible compared to other 
> costs in the benchmark, or because the read/write blend was too scewed 
> towards writes -- I think probably the former rather than the latter).

I would track the read/write lock mix to get an idea of what the
ratio is.

-Alfred