From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 13:47:41 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E983316A41A; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:47:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: from blah.sun-fish.com (blah.sun-fish.com [217.18.249.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9671913C4E1; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:47:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix, from userid 1002) id CA8AC1B10F2C; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:47:39 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on blah.cmotd.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.6 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 Received: from hater.haters.org (hater.cmotd.com [192.168.3.125]) by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2DF21B10F31; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:47:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47B051F8.1040309@moneybookers.com> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:47:36 +0200 From: Stefan Lambrev User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071120) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4794E6CC.1050107@moneybookers.com> <47A0B023.5020401@moneybookers.com> <47A3074A.3040409@moneybookers.com> <47A72EAB.6070602@moneybookers.com> <20080204182945.GA49276@heff.fud.org.nz> <47A780C0.2060201@moneybookers.com> <47A799A6.3070502@moneybookers.com> <47A84751.8020109@moneybookers.com> <47A8D233.8020506@FreeBSD.org> <47A8DCD6.3060209@moneybookers.com> <47A8E1F1.4040309@FreeBSD.org> <47A98CDC.2090407@moneybookers.com> <47A993D0.1060901@FreeBSD.org> <47A99736.8060809@moneybookers.com> <47A99B16.6030305@FreeBSD.org> <47A9B636.3040509@moneybookers.com> <47AA1395.2090501@FreeBSD.org> <47AAEE39.3020805@moneybookers.com> In-Reply-To: <47AAEE39.3020805@moneybookers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/5770/Mon Feb 11 12:42:17 2008 on blah.cmotd.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: network performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:47:42 -0000 Greetings Kris, If you are still interested here is the output of pmcstat on quad core, when acting as bridge http://89.186.204.158/hwpmc-p4-bridge.txt With your kernel the bridge can't handle more then 400k incoming packets, but I noticed that netisr2 is not active at all in bridge configurations. With 7.0RC1 in bridge configuration the server is able to handle more then 1mil incoming packets/s. -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 15:13:56 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D94E16A420 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:13:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu) Received: from people.fsn.hu (people.fsn.hu [195.228.252.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D6EA13C469 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:13:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu) Received: from japan.t-online.private (people [192.168.2.4]) by people.fsn.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34EF70B89; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:13:47 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47B1B7AB.9030609@fsn.hu> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:13:47 +0100 From: Attila Nagy User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071204) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Andrews References: <200802040031.m140V3mt039006@drugs.dv.isc.org> In-Reply-To: <200802040031.m140V3mt039006@drugs.dv.isc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: =?UTF-8?B?SklOTUVJIFRhdHV5YSAvIOelnuaYjumBlOWTiQ==?= , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, bind-users@isc.org Subject: Re: max-cache-size doesn't work with 9.5.0b1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:13:56 -0000 On 02/04/08 01:31, Mark Andrews wrote: >> >> Please try this patch. >> >> Mark >> > > Revised. > > Index: lib/isc/mem.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /proj/cvs/prod/bind9/lib/isc/mem.c,v > retrieving revision 1.140 > diff -u -r1.140 mem.c > --- lib/isc/mem.c 18 Jan 2008 23:46:58 -0000 1.140 > +++ lib/isc/mem.c 4 Feb 2008 00:29:44 -0000 > @@ -1086,7 +1086,6 @@ > ADD_TRACE(ctx, ptr, size, file, line); > if (ctx->hi_water != 0U && !ctx->hi_called && > ctx->inuse > ctx->hi_water) { > - ctx->hi_called = ISC_TRUE; > call_water = ISC_TRUE; > } > if (ctx->inuse > ctx->maxinuse) { > @@ -1144,8 +1143,6 @@ > */ > if (ctx->hi_called && > (ctx->inuse < ctx->lo_water || ctx->lo_water == 0U)) { > - ctx->hi_called = ISC_FALSE; > - > if (ctx->water != NULL) > call_water = ISC_TRUE; > } > @@ -1155,6 +1152,18 @@ > (ctx->water)(ctx->water_arg, ISC_MEM_LOWATER); > } > > +void > +isc_mem_water(isc_mem_t *ctx, int flag) { > + REQUIRE(VALID_CONTEXT(ctx)); > + > + MCTXLOCK(ctx, &ctx->lock); > + if (flag == ISC_MEM_LOWATER) > + ctx->hi_called = ISC_FALSE; > + else if (flag == ISC_MEM_HIWATER) > + ctx->hi_called = ISC_TRUE; > + MCTXUNLOCK(ctx, &ctx->lock); > +} > + > #if ISC_MEM_TRACKLINES > static void > print_active(isc_mem_t *mctx, FILE *out) { > Index: lib/dns/acache.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /proj/cvs/prod/bind9/lib/dns/acache.c,v > retrieving revision 1.20 > diff -u -r1.20 acache.c > --- lib/dns/acache.c 19 Jun 2007 23:47:16 -0000 1.20 > +++ lib/dns/acache.c 4 Feb 2008 00:29:46 -0000 > @@ -965,10 +965,14 @@ > > LOCK(&acache->cleaner.lock); > > - acache->cleaner.overmem = overmem; > + if (acache->cleaner.overmem != overmem) { > + acache->cleaner.overmem = overmem; > > - if (acache->cleaner.overmem_event != NULL) > - isc_task_send(acache->task, &acache->cleaner.overmem_event); > + if (acache->cleaner.overmem_event != NULL) > + isc_task_send(acache->task, > + &acache->cleaner.overmem_event); > + isc_mem_water(acache->mctx, mark); > + } > > UNLOCK(&acache->cleaner.lock); > } > Index: lib/dns/adb.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /proj/cvs/prod/bind9/lib/dns/adb.c,v > retrieving revision 1.233 > diff -u -r1.233 adb.c > --- lib/dns/adb.c 19 Oct 2007 17:15:53 -0000 1.233 > +++ lib/dns/adb.c 4 Feb 2008 00:29:50 -0000 > @@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ > > isc_mutex_t lock; > isc_mutex_t reflock; /*%< Covers irefcnt, erefcnt */ > + isc_mutex_t overmemlock; /*%< Covers overmem */ > isc_mem_t *mctx; > dns_view_t *view; > isc_timermgr_t *timermgr; > @@ -2138,6 +2139,7 @@ > DESTROYLOCK(&adb->reflock); > DESTROYLOCK(&adb->lock); > DESTROYLOCK(&adb->mplock); > + DESTROYLOCK(&adb->overmemlock); > > isc_mem_putanddetach(&adb->mctx, adb, sizeof(dns_adb_t)); > } > @@ -2225,6 +2227,10 @@ > if (result != ISC_R_SUCCESS) > goto fail0d; > > + result = isc_mutex_init(&adb->overmemlock); > + if (result != ISC_R_SUCCESS) > + goto fail0e; > + > /* > * Initialize the bucket locks for names and elements. > * May as well initialize the list heads, too. > @@ -2343,6 +2349,8 @@ > if (adb->afmp != NULL) > isc_mempool_destroy(&adb->afmp); > > + DESTROYLOCK(&adb->overmemlock); > + fail0e: > DESTROYLOCK(&adb->reflock); > fail0d: > DESTROYLOCK(&adb->mplock); > @@ -3782,16 +3790,21 @@ > DP(ISC_LOG_DEBUG(1), > "adb reached %s water mark", overmem ? "high" : "low"); > > - adb->overmem = overmem; > + LOCK(&adb->overmemlock); > + if (adb->overmem != overmem) { > + adb->overmem = overmem; > #if 0 /* we don't need this timer for the new cleaning policy. */ > - if (overmem) { > - isc_interval_t interval; > + if (overmem) { > + isc_interval_t interval; > > - isc_interval_set(&interval, 0, 1); > - (void)isc_timer_reset(adb->timer, isc_timertype_once, NULL, > - &interval, ISC_TRUE); > - } > -#endif > + isc_interval_set(&interval, 0, 1); > + (void)isc_timer_reset(adb->timer, isc_timertype_once, > + NULL, &interval, ISC_TRUE); > + } > +#endif > + isc_mem_water(adb->mctx, mark); > + } > + UNLOCK(&adb->overmemlock); > } > > void > Index: lib/dns/cache.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /proj/cvs/prod/bind9/lib/dns/cache.c,v > retrieving revision 1.76 > diff -u -r1.76 cache.c > --- lib/dns/cache.c 19 Oct 2007 17:15:53 -0000 1.76 > +++ lib/dns/cache.c 4 Feb 2008 00:29:51 -0000 > @@ -708,8 +708,11 @@ > > LOCK(&cache->cleaner.lock); > > - dns_db_overmem(cache->db, overmem); > - cache->cleaner.overmem = overmem; > + if (overmem != cache->cleaner.overmem) { > + dns_db_overmem(cache->db, overmem); > + cache->cleaner.overmem = overmem; > + isc_mem_water(cache->mctx, mark); > + } > > UNLOCK(&cache->cleaner.lock); > } > Sorry about the long delay... With this patch, the memory usage still grows well beyond the set limit (32M in this case, 380M resident usage after about 10 minutes of running). Applied to b2. -- Attila Nagy e-mail: Attila.Nagy@fsn.hu Free Software Network (FSN.HU) phone: +3630 306 6758 http://www.fsn.hu/ From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 17:10:21 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F9316A418 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:10:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu) Received: from people.fsn.hu (people.fsn.hu [195.228.252.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7692D13C46E for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:10:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu) Received: from japan.t-online.private (people [192.168.2.4]) by people.fsn.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8746172D25; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:10:12 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47B1D2F4.5070304@fsn.hu> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:10:12 +0100 From: Attila Nagy User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071204) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?SklOTUVJIFRhdHV5YSAvIOelnuaYjumBlOWTiQ==?= References: <475B0F3E.5070100@fsn.hu> <479DFE74.8030004@fsn.hu> <479F02A7.9020607@fsn.hu> <47A614E9.4030501@fsn.hu> <47A77A13.6010802@fsn.hu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, bind-users@isc.org Subject: Re: max-cache-size doesn't work with 9.5.0b1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:10:21 -0000 On 02/06/08 04:57, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote: > One other usual suspect is BIND9's "acache" if you enable it and the > server also acts as a (busy) authoritative server. Is this the case > for you? (But again, it should also cause the same problem for 9.4.2, > so I don't think this is the reason, either) > No, this is a caching only nameserver (but have some RFC1918 reverse zones defined as empty to overcome problems with IANA's blackhole servers). > Then named will listen on [your_ip_address]:some_port, and you can > browse internal statistics by accessing > http://[your_ip_address]:some_port with your browser. When you notice > the memory starts growing, retrieving the information several times, > and compare the "Memory" section at the end of the page. If the > memory hog is inside named, there should be significant growth in some > of the rows accordingly. > Here are the results: http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memory-20080212/ and at the end, the relevant line from top. Is this FreeBSD leaking then? -- Attila Nagy e-mail: Attila.Nagy@fsn.hu Free Software Network (FSN.HU) phone: +3630 306 6758 http://www.fsn.hu/ From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 12:07:08 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F69C16A418 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:07:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu) Received: from people.fsn.hu (people.fsn.hu [195.228.252.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8A313C442 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:07:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bra@fsn.hu) Received: from japan.t-online.private (people [192.168.2.4]) by people.fsn.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id E547A70A63; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:07:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47B2DD62.6020507@fsn.hu> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:06:58 +0100 From: Attila Nagy User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071204) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?SklOTUVJIFRhdHV5YSAvIOelnuaYjumBlOWTiQ==?= References: <475B0F3E.5070100@fsn.hu> <479DFE74.8030004@fsn.hu> <479F02A7.9020607@fsn.hu> <47A614E9.4030501@fsn.hu> <47A77A13.6010802@fsn.hu> <47B1D2F4.5070304@fsn.hu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, bind-users@isc.org Subject: Re: max-cache-size doesn't work with 9.5.0b1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:07:08 -0000 On 02/12/08 18:55, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote: > At Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:10:12 +0100, > Attila Nagy wrote: > > >>> Then named will listen on [your_ip_address]:some_port, and you can >>> browse internal statistics by accessing >>> http://[your_ip_address]:some_port with your browser. When you notice >>> the memory starts growing, retrieving the information several times, >>> and compare the "Memory" section at the end of the page. If the >>> memory hog is inside named, there should be significant growth in some >>> of the rows accordingly. >>> >>> >> Here are the results: >> http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memory-20080212/ >> and at the end, the relevant line from top. >> >> Is this FreeBSD leaking then? >> > > Looking at the last stat > http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memory-20080212/bind4 > even the total of "MaxUse" is about 69MB, while the ps output > indicates the resident size is 441MB. So, yes, there should be > something odd not directly related to the named's (normal) behavior. > > Can you try the same test with only one worker thread (by using the > '-n 1' command line option)? Then we may be able to chase the problem > further. > Of course. See the bindn1 files at the same location. (only the memory section included) The effect is pretty much the same. -- Attila Nagy e-mail: Attila.Nagy@fsn.hu Free Software Network (FSN.HU) phone: +3630 306 6758 http://www.fsn.hu/ From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 14:46:12 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3545016A580; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:46:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk) Received: from mail.itu.dk (pluto.itu.dk [130.226.142.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F37FA13C442; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:46:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk) Received: from [192.168.1.148] (stud1-15.itu.dk [130.226.140.15]) by mail.itu.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA0D32DBAF; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:46:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <47B302B2.30607@cederstrand.dk> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:46:10 +0100 From: Erik Cederstrand User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brooks Davis References: <4796C717.9000507@cederstrand.dk> <20080123193400.N63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A245.7080202@cederstrand.dk> <20080123202433.E63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A802.8060509@FreeBSD.org> <47A0BFE7.4070708@cederstrand.dk> <20080130190000.GA18333@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <47AC15A5.5020009@cederstrand.dk> <20080208151756.GA35423@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <20080208151756.GA35423@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, kris@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance Tracker project update X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:46:12 -0000 Brooks Davis skrev: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:41:09AM +0100, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >> I finally got around to testing this, and with a combination of mtree >> comparing md5 hashes, bsdiff compacting changed files and hardlinking >> unchanged files I get a reduction in size from 256MB to 10MB. Pretty good, >> and the whole operation only takes a few minutes. > > Cool! > >> I have one peculiarity, though. I install python2.5 into the directory >> containing the build, and even though the python version has not changed, I >> still get mismatching md5 sums on every .pyo and .pyc file. Any thoughts on >> this? > > I'm not a python guru by any means, but I think .pyc files probably have data > about the .py they are generated from because there's some sort of > auto-generation available. It may be possible to not store them at all and > just generate them before you use them or add some magic build flags to cause > them to store some sort of cooked values. I'm not sure where the .pyo files > come from. As suggested in other posts, deleting .pyo and .pyc files gets me down to 6MB. Static libraries (.a files) in /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib still have mismatching MD5 sums even though no source code change warrants this. Can I do anything about that? Are static libraries even needed anymore? Erik From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 15:46:10 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0620916A475; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:46:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (cl-162.ewr-01.us.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:4830:1200:a1::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851B213C46A; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:46:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m1DFk5Pa006471; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:46:05 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: (from brooks@localhost) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.14.1/8.13.8/Submit) id m1DFk52I006470; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:46:05 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from brooks) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:46:05 -0600 From: Brooks Davis To: Erik Cederstrand Message-ID: <20080213154605.GA96732@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <4796C717.9000507@cederstrand.dk> <20080123193400.N63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A245.7080202@cederstrand.dk> <20080123202433.E63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A802.8060509@FreeBSD.org> <47A0BFE7.4070708@cederstrand.dk> <20080130190000.GA18333@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <47AC15A5.5020009@cederstrand.dk> <20080208151756.GA35423@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <47B302B2.30607@cederstrand.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47B302B2.30607@cederstrand.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (lor.one-eyed-alien.net [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:46:05 -0600 (CST) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Brooks Davis , kris@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance Tracker project update X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:46:10 -0000 --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 03:46:10PM +0100, Erik Cederstrand wrote: > Brooks Davis skrev: >> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:41:09AM +0100, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >>> I finally got around to testing this, and with a combination of mtree= =20 >>> comparing md5 hashes, bsdiff compacting changed files and hardlinking= =20 >>> unchanged files I get a reduction in size from 256MB to 10MB. Pretty=20 >>> good, and the whole operation only takes a few minutes. >> Cool! >>> I have one peculiarity, though. I install python2.5 into the directory= =20 >>> containing the build, and even though the python version has not change= d,=20 >>> I still get mismatching md5 sums on every .pyo and .pyc file. Any=20 >>> thoughts on this? >> I'm not a python guru by any means, but I think .pyc files probably have= =20 >> data >> about the .py they are generated from because there's some sort of >> auto-generation available. It may be possible to not store them at all= =20 >> and >> just generate them before you use them or add some magic build flags to= =20 >> cause >> them to store some sort of cooked values. I'm not sure where the .pyo= =20 >> files >> come from. >=20 > As suggested in other posts, deleting .pyo and .pyc files gets me down to= =20 > 6MB. Static libraries (.a files) in /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib still hav= e=20 > mismatching MD5 sums even though no source code change warrants this. Can= I=20 > do anything about that? Are static libraries even needed anymore? I'd suggest checking with cperciva@ about those for freebsd-update. Static libs are mostly not needed these days, but some are. -- Brooks --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFHsxC8XY6L6fI4GtQRAqAyAKDWL+8WM08mt69OcctA/AX7DGW9BwCgr9J/ iEO1gygtylg9ngPqDlNod8w= =NSSh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 16:31:04 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E49416A417 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:31:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@sopwith.solgatos.com) Received: from schitzo.solgatos.com (pool-72-90-115-244.ptldor.fios.verizon.net [72.90.115.244]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012F513C447 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:31:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@sopwith.solgatos.com) Received: from schitzo.solgatos.com (localhost.home.localnet [127.0.0.1]) by schitzo.solgatos.com (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m1DGV3Ir013945 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:31:03 -0800 Received: from sopwith.solgatos.com (uucp@localhost) by schitzo.solgatos.com (8.14.1/8.13.4/Submit) with UUCP id m1DGV39e013942 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:31:03 -0800 Received: from localhost by sopwith.solgatos.com (8.8.8/6.24) id QAA06470; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:29:51 GMT Message-Id: <200802131629.QAA06470@sopwith.solgatos.com> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:46:05 CST." <20080213154605.GA96732@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:29:51 +0000 From: Dieter Subject: Re: Performance Tracker project update X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:31:04 -0000 > As suggested in other posts, deleting .pyo and .pyc files gets me down to > 6MB. Static libraries (.a files) in /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib still have > mismatching MD5 sums even though no source code change warrants this. Can > I do anything about that? Perhaps they have an embedded timestamp or version number? > Are static libraries even needed anymore? Are you going to be compiling anything? Has anyone compared performance of static vs dynamic linking lately? IIRC dynamic linking has a runtime performance hit which may or may not be significant depending on what you're doing. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 17:14:47 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA21816A41B for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:14:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk) Received: from mail.itu.dk (pluto.itu.dk [130.226.142.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB17D13C4E8 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:14:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk) Received: from [192.168.1.148] (stud1-15.itu.dk [130.226.140.15]) by mail.itu.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B0832DCBD; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:14:47 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <47B32587.40700@cederstrand.dk> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:14:47 +0100 From: Erik Cederstrand User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dieter References: <200802131629.QAA06470@sopwith.solgatos.com> In-Reply-To: <200802131629.QAA06470@sopwith.solgatos.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance Tracker project update X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:14:47 -0000 Dieter skrev: >> As suggested in other posts, deleting .pyo and .pyc files gets me down to >> 6MB. Static libraries (.a files) in /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib still have >> mismatching MD5 sums even though no source code change warrants this. Can >> I do anything about that? > > Perhaps they have an embedded timestamp or version number? This seems to be the case: # strings DIR1/usr/lib/libfetch.a > tmp1 # strings DIR2/usr/lib/libfetch.a > tmp2 # diff tmp1 tmp2 2c2 < / 1200728973 0 0 0 954 ` --- > / 1200723259 0 0 0 954 ` 57c57 < file.o/ 1200728973 0 0 100644 2356 ` --- > file.o/ 1200723259 0 0 100644 2356 ` 86c86 < http.o/ 1200728973 0 0 100644 17180 ` --- > http.o/ 1200723258 0 0 100644 17180 ` [...] The changing number is the modification date of the .o file (I think). >> Are static libraries even needed anymore? > > Are you going to be compiling anything? I'm compiling ports, but I could delete the files afterwards. It would be nice to be able to compile stuff in the images in the future, though. I think I'll just leave the files there for the time being. It's a size reduction of less than 1 MB. Erik From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 20:55:51 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F2716A417; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:55:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd-performance@mawer.org) Received: from outbound.icp-qv1-irony-out4.iinet.net.au (outbound.icp-qv1-irony-out4.iinet.net.au [203.59.1.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E287013C4D3; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:55:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd-performance@mawer.org) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAE/mskfLzq3r/2dsb2JhbAAIrkg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,347,1199631600"; d="scan'208";a="180553639" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.24.1.1]) ([203.206.173.235]) by outbound.icp-qv1-irony-out4.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2008 05:45:26 +0900 Message-ID: <47B356C2.50200@mawer.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:44:50 +1100 From: Antony Mawer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erik Cederstrand References: <4796C717.9000507@cederstrand.dk> <20080123193400.N63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A245.7080202@cederstrand.dk> <20080123202433.E63024@fledge.watson.org> <4797A802.8060509@FreeBSD.org> <47A0BFE7.4070708@cederstrand.dk> <20080130190000.GA18333@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <47AC15A5.5020009@cederstrand.dk> <20080208151756.GA35423@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <47B302B2.30607@cederstrand.dk> In-Reply-To: <47B302B2.30607@cederstrand.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Brooks Davis , kris@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance Tracker project update X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:55:51 -0000 Erik Cederstrand wrote: > Brooks Davis skrev: >> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:41:09AM +0100, Erik Cederstrand wrote: >>> I finally got around to testing this, and with a combination of mtree >>> comparing md5 hashes, bsdiff compacting changed files and hardlinking >>> unchanged files I get a reduction in size from 256MB to 10MB. Pretty >>> good, and the whole operation only takes a few minutes. >> >> Cool! >> >>> I have one peculiarity, though. I install python2.5 into the >>> directory containing the build, and even though the python version >>> has not changed, I still get mismatching md5 sums on every .pyo and >>> .pyc file. Any thoughts on this? ... > > As suggested in other posts, deleting .pyo and .pyc files gets me down > to 6MB. Static libraries (.a files) in /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib still > have mismatching MD5 sums even though no source code change warrants > this. Can I do anything about that? Are static libraries even needed > anymore? You may want to look at freebsd-update: I believe it has some smarts to NULL out certain date/time information in files before doing a comparison, so that embedded timestamps don't cause two otherwise identical files to show as different... At least that is what I recall ... :-) --Antony From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 20:44:01 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A306916A41B for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org) Received: from mon.jinmei.org (mon.jinmei.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:36::162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89CA213C4E8 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org) Received: from dhcp-182.sql1.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb:217:f2ff:fee0:a91f]) by mon.jinmei.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C2A033C59; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:44:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:44:01 -0800 Message-ID: From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= To: Attila Nagy In-Reply-To: <47B2DD62.6020507@fsn.hu> References: <475B0F3E.5070100@fsn.hu> <479DFE74.8030004@fsn.hu> <479F02A7.9020607@fsn.hu> <47A614E9.4030501@fsn.hu> <47A77A13.6010802@fsn.hu> <47B1D2F4.5070304@fsn.hu> <47B2DD62.6020507@fsn.hu> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/22.0 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Multipart_Wed_Feb_13_12:44:00_2008-1" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:29:19 +0000 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, bind-users@isc.org Subject: Re: max-cache-size doesn't work with 9.5.0b1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:44:01 -0000 --Multipart_Wed_Feb_13_12:44:00_2008-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII At Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:06:58 +0100, Attila Nagy wrote: > Of course. See the bindn1 files at the same location. (only the memory > section included) > The effect is pretty much the same. Okay, then please try this patch with '-n 1' (note: this patch doesn't contain the memory statistics hack via the HTTP interface, but I don't we don't need it for this test). --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. --Multipart_Wed_Feb_13_12:44:00_2008-1 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; type=patch Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="bind-9.5.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PyBsaWIvYmluZC9pbmNsdWRlL2lzYy9wbGF0Zm9ybS5oCj8gbGliL2Rucy9nZW4uZFNZTQo/IGxp Yi9kbnMvcmJ0ZGIuYy10ZXN0CkluZGV4OiBsaWIvZG5zL2FkYi5jCj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0KUkNTIGZp bGU6IC9wcm9qL2N2cy9wcm9kL2JpbmQ5L2xpYi9kbnMvYWRiLmMsdgpyZXRyaWV2aW5nIHJldmlz aW9uIDEuMjMzCmRpZmYgLXUgLXIxLjIzMyBhZGIuYwotLS0gbGliL2Rucy9hZGIuYwkxOSBPY3Qg MjAwNyAxNzoxNTo1MyAtMDAwMAkxLjIzMworKysgbGliL2Rucy9hZGIuYwkxMyBGZWIgMjAwOCAy MDozOTo1NyAtMDAwMApAQCAtNTYsNiArNTYsMTAgQEAKICNpbmNsdWRlIDxkbnMvcmVzb2x2ZXIu aD4KICNpbmNsdWRlIDxkbnMvcmVzdWx0Lmg+CiAKKyNpZm5kZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHMgorI2RlZmlu ZSBMUlVfREVCVUcyIDAKKyNlbmRpZgorCiAjZGVmaW5lIEROU19BREJfTUFHSUMgICAgICAgICAg ICAgSVNDX01BR0lDKCdEJywgJ2EnLCAnZCcsICdiJykKICNkZWZpbmUgRE5TX0FEQl9WQUxJRCh4 KSAgICAgICAgICBJU0NfTUFHSUNfVkFMSUQoeCwgRE5TX0FEQl9NQUdJQykKICNkZWZpbmUgRE5T X0FEQk5BTUVfTUFHSUMgICAgICAgICBJU0NfTUFHSUMoJ2EnLCAnZCcsICdiJywgJ04nKQpAQCAt MTMzLDcgKzEzNyw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgIGlzY190aW1lcm1ncl90ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAq dGltZXJtZ3I7CiAgICAgICAgIGlzY190aW1lcl90ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAqdGltZXI7 CiAKLSNpZmRlZiBMUlVfREVCVUcKKyNpZiBMUlVfREVCVUcyCiAgICAgICAgIGlzY190aW1lcl90 ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAqZHVtcF90aW1lcjsgLyogZm9yIHRlc3QgKi8KICAgICAgICAg aXNjX3RpbWVfdCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBkdW1wX3RpbWU7IC8qIGZvciB0ZXN0ICov CiAjZGVmaW5lIERVTVBfSU5URVJWQUwgMzAgICAgICAgIC8qIHNlY29uZHMgKi8KQEAgLTM1NSw3 ICszNTksNyBAQAogc3RhdGljIHZvaWQgd2F0ZXIodm9pZCAqLCBpbnQpOwogc3RhdGljIHZvaWQg ZHVtcF9lbnRyeShGSUxFICosIGRuc19hZGJlbnRyeV90ICosIGlzY19ib29sZWFuX3QsIGlzY19z dGR0aW1lX3QpOwogCi0jaWZkZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHCisjaWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHMgogc3RhdGljIHZv aWQgdGltZXJfZHVtcChpc2NfdGFza190ICosIGlzY19ldmVudF90ICopOwogI2VuZGlmCiAKQEAg LTgxNiw5ICs4MjAsOSBAQAogc3RhdGljIGlubGluZSB2b2lkCiB2aW9sYXRlX2xvY2tpbmdfaGll cmFyY2h5KGlzY19tdXRleF90ICpoYXZlLCBpc2NfbXV0ZXhfdCAqd2FudCkgewogICAgICAgICBp ZiAoaXNjX211dGV4X3RyeWxvY2sod2FudCkgIT0gSVNDX1JfU1VDQ0VTUykgewotICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgIFVOTE9DSyhoYXZlKTsKKyAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAvKlVOTE9DSyhoYXZlKTsqLwog ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIExPQ0sod2FudCk7Ci0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgTE9DSyhoYXZlKTsK KyAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAvKkxPQ0soaGF2ZSk7Ki8KICAgICAgICAgfQogfQogCkBAIC0xMDY5 LDEwICsxMDczLDEwIEBACiAgICAgICAgIGZpbmQgPSBldmVudC0+ZXZfZGVzdHJveV9hcmc7CiAg ICAgICAgIElOU0lTVChETlNfQURCRklORF9WQUxJRChmaW5kKSk7CiAKLSAgICAgICAgTE9DSygm ZmluZC0+bG9jayk7CisgICAgICAgIC8qTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7Ki8KICAgICAgICAgZmlu ZC0+ZmxhZ3MgfD0gRklORF9FVkVOVF9GUkVFRDsKICAgICAgICAgZXZlbnQtPmV2X2Rlc3Ryb3lf YXJnID0gTlVMTDsKLSAgICAgICAgVU5MT0NLKCZmaW5kLT5sb2NrKTsKKyAgICAgICAgLypVTkxP Q0soJmZpbmQtPmxvY2spOyovCiB9CiAKIC8qCkBAIC0xMDk1LDcgKzEwOTksNyBAQAogCiAgICAg ICAgIGZpbmQgPSBJU0NfTElTVF9IRUFEKG5hbWUtPmZpbmRzKTsKICAgICAgICAgd2hpbGUgKGZp bmQgIT0gTlVMTCkgewotICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIExPQ0soJmZpbmQtPmxvY2spOworICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIC8qTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7Ki8KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBuZXh0X2Zp bmQgPSBJU0NfTElTVF9ORVhUKGZpbmQsIHBsaW5rKTsKIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIHByb2Nl c3MgPSBJU0NfRkFMU0U7CkBAIC0xMTUzLDcgKzExNTcsNyBAQAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgRFAoREVGX0xFVkVMLCAiY2Zhbjogc2tpcHBpbmcgZmluZCAlcCIsIGZpbmQpOwogICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgIH0KIAotICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFVOTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7Cisg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgLypVTkxPQ0soJmZpbmQtPmxvY2spOyovCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ZmluZCA9IG5leHRfZmluZDsKICAgICAgICAgfQogCkBAIC0xNDg2LDExICsxNDkwLDEzIEBACiAg ICAgICAgIC8qCiAgICAgICAgICAqIHByaXZhdGUgbWVtYmVycwogICAgICAgICAgKi8KKyNpZiAw CQkJCS8qIGRpc2FibGUgZm9yIGRpYWdub3NlICovCiAgICAgICAgIHJlc3VsdCA9IGlzY19tdXRl eF9pbml0KCZoLT5sb2NrKTsKICAgICAgICAgaWYgKHJlc3VsdCAhPSBJU0NfUl9TVUNDRVNTKSB7 CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgaXNjX21lbXBvb2xfcHV0KGFkYi0+YWhtcCwgaCk7CiAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgcmV0dXJuIChOVUxMKTsKICAgICAgICAgfQorI2VuZGlmCiAKICAgICAgICAgSVND X0VWRU5UX0lOSVQoJmgtPmV2ZW50LCBzaXplb2YoaXNjX2V2ZW50X3QpLCAwLCAwLCAwLCBOVUxM LCBOVUxMLAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBOVUxMLCBOVUxMLCBoKTsKQEAgLTE1NzMs NyArMTU3OSw5IEBACiAKICAgICAgICAgZmluZC0+bWFnaWMgPSAwOwogCisjaWYgMAkJCQkvKiBk aXNhYmxlIGZvciBkaWFnbm9zZSAqLwogICAgICAgICBERVNUUk9ZTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7 CisjZW5kaWYKICAgICAgICAgaXNjX21lbXBvb2xfcHV0KGFkYi0+YWhtcCwgZmluZCk7CiAgICAg ICAgIHJldHVybiAoZGVjX2FkYl9pcmVmY250KGFkYikpOwogfQpAQCAtMTgzMCw3ICsxODM4LDcg QEAKICAgICAgICAgICovCiAgICAgICAgIExPQ0soJmFkYi0+bG9jayk7CiAgICAgICAgIGlzY190 aW1lcl9kZXRhY2goJmFkYi0+dGltZXIpOwotI2lmZGVmIExSVV9ERUJVRworI2lmIExSVV9ERUJV RzIKICAgICAgICAgaXNjX3RpbWVyX2RldGFjaCgmYWRiLT5kdW1wX3RpbWVyKTsKICNlbmRpZgog ICAgICAgICBVTkxPQ0soJmFkYi0+bG9jayk7CkBAIC0yMTgxLDcgKzIxODksNyBAQAogICAgICAg ICBhZGItPmFmbXAgPSBOVUxMOwogICAgICAgICBhZGItPnRhc2sgPSBOVUxMOwogICAgICAgICBh ZGItPnRpbWVyID0gTlVMTDsKLSNpZmRlZiBMUlVfREVCVUcKKyNpZiBMUlVfREVCVUcyCiAgICAg ICAgIGFkYi0+ZHVtcF90aW1lciA9IE5VTEw7CiAjZW5kaWYKICAgICAgICAgYWRiLT5tY3R4ID0g TlVMTDsKQEAgLTIyODgsNyArMjI5Niw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgIGlmIChyZXN1bHQgIT0gSVNDX1Jf U1VDQ0VTUykKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBnb3RvIGZhaWwzOwogCi0jaWZkZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVH CisjaWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHMgogICAgICAgICB7CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgaXNjX2ludGVydmFs X3QgaW50ZXJ2YWw7CiAKQEAgLTI4MTEsNyArMjgxOSw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgIGZpbmQgPSAqZmlu ZHA7CiAgICAgICAgICpmaW5kcCA9IE5VTEw7CiAKLSAgICAgICAgTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7 CisgICAgICAgIC8qTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7Ki8KIAogICAgICAgICBEUChERUZfTEVWRUws ICJkbnNfYWRiX2Rlc3Ryb3lmaW5kIG9uIGZpbmQgJXAiLCBmaW5kKTsKIApAQCAtMjgyMyw3ICsy ODMxLDcgQEAKICAgICAgICAgYnVja2V0ID0gZmluZC0+bmFtZV9idWNrZXQ7CiAgICAgICAgIElO U0lTVChidWNrZXQgPT0gRE5TX0FEQl9JTlZBTElEQlVDS0VUKTsKIAotICAgICAgICBVTkxPQ0so JmZpbmQtPmxvY2spOworICAgICAgICAvKlVOTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7Ki8KIAogICAgICAg ICAvKgogICAgICAgICAgKiBUaGUgZmluZCBkb2Vzbid0IGV4aXN0IG9uIGFueSBsaXN0LCBhbmQg bm90aGluZyBpcyBsb2NrZWQuCkBAIC0yODYzLDcgKzI4NzEsNyBAQAogICAgICAgICBpbnQgYnVj a2V0OwogICAgICAgICBpbnQgdW5sb2NrX2J1Y2tldDsKIAotICAgICAgICBMT0NLKCZmaW5kLT5s b2NrKTsKKyAgICAgICAgLypMT0NLKCZmaW5kLT5sb2NrKTsqLwogCiAgICAgICAgIERQKERFRl9M RVZFTCwgImRuc19hZGJfY2FuY2VsZmluZCBvbiBmaW5kICVwIiwgZmluZCk7CiAKQEAgLTI5MDks NyArMjkxNyw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgaXNjX3Rhc2tfc2VuZGFuZGRldGFjaCgmdGFz aywgKGlzY19ldmVudF90ICoqKSZldik7CiAgICAgICAgIH0KIAotICAgICAgICBVTkxPQ0soJmZp bmQtPmxvY2spOworICAgICAgICAvKlVOTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7Ki8KIH0KIAogdm9pZApA QCAtMzA3MSw3ICszMDc5LDcgQEAKICAgICAgICAgICogd2FudCB0byBkdW1wIG91dCB0aGUgbmFt ZSBhbmQvb3IgZW50cmllcyB0b28uCiAgICAgICAgICAqLwogCi0gICAgICAgIExPQ0soJmZpbmQt PmxvY2spOworICAgICAgICAvKkxPQ0soJmZpbmQtPmxvY2spOyovCiAKICAgICAgICAgZnByaW50 ZihmLCAiO0ZpbmQgJXBcbiIsIGZpbmQpOwogICAgICAgICBmcHJpbnRmKGYsICI7XHRxcGVuZGlu ZyAlMDh4IHBhcnRpYWwgJTA4eCBvcHRpb25zICUwOHggZmxhZ3MgJTA4eFxuIiwKQEAgLTMxMDgs NyArMzExNiw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgYWkgPSBJU0NfTElTVF9ORVhUKGFpLCBwdWJs aW5rKTsKICAgICAgICAgfQogCi0gICAgICAgIFVOTE9DSygmZmluZC0+bG9jayk7CisgICAgICAg IC8qVU5MT0NLKCZmaW5kLT5sb2NrKTsqLwogfQogCiBzdGF0aWMgdm9pZApAQCAtMzc3OSw2ICsz Nzg3LDEzIEBACiAKICAgICAgICAgUkVRVUlSRShETlNfQURCX1ZBTElEKGFkYikpOwogCisjaWYg TFJVX0RFQlVHMiA+IDEKKwlpc2NfbG9nX3dyaXRlKGRuc19sY3R4LCBETlNfTE9HQ0FURUdPUllf REFUQUJBU0UsCisJCSAgICAgIEROU19MT0dNT0RVTEVfQ0FDSEUsIElTQ19MT0dfSU5GTywKKwkJ ICAgICAgIkFEQiAlcDogb3Zlcm1lbSBzd2l0Y2ggdG8gJXMsIG1lbSBpbnVzZSAlbHUiLAorCQkg ICAgICBhZGIsIG92ZXJtZW0gPyAiVFJVRSIgOiAiRkFMU0UiLAorCQkgICAgICAodW5zaWduZWQg bG9uZylpc2NfbWVtX2ludXNlKGFkYi0+bWN0eCkpOworI2VuZGlmCiAgICAgICAgIERQKElTQ19M T0dfREVCVUcoMSksCiAgICAgICAgICAgICJhZGIgcmVhY2hlZCAlcyB3YXRlciBtYXJrIiwgb3Zl cm1lbSA/ICJoaWdoIiA6ICJsb3ciKTsKIApAQCAtMzgxMyw3ICszODI4LDcgQEAKICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICBpc2NfbWVtX3NldHdhdGVyKGFkYi0+bWN0eCwgd2F0ZXIsIGFkYiwgaGl3YXRlciwg bG93YXRlcik7CiB9CiAKLSNpZmRlZiBMUlVfREVCVUcKKyNpZiBMUlVfREVCVUcyCiAvKgogICog UGVyaW9kaWMgZHVtcGluZyBvZiB0aGUgaW50ZXJuYWwgc3RhdGUgb2YgdGhlIHN0YXRpc3RpY3Mu CiAgKiBUaGlzIHdpbGwgZHVtcCB0aGUgY2FjaGUgY29udGVudHMsIHVzZXMsIHJlY29yZCB0eXBl cywgZXRjLgpAQCAtMzgzMCwxOCArMzg0NSwxMSBAQAogICAgICAgICBJTlNJU1QoRE5TX0FEQl9W QUxJRChhZGIpKTsKIAogICAgICAgICBMT0NLKCZhZGItPmxvY2spOwotICAgICAgICBpZiAoYWRi LT5ubmFtZSA+IDAgfHwgYWRiLT5uZW50cnkgPiAwKSB7Ci0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgaXNjX2xv Z193cml0ZShkbnNfbGN0eCwgRE5TX0xPR0NBVEVHT1JZX0RBVEFCQVNFLAotICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgRE5TX0xPR01PRFVMRV9BREIsIElTQ19MT0dfSU5GTywKLSAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICJBREIgbWVtb3J5IHVzYWdlICVwOiBtZW0gaW51c2Ug JWx1LCAiCi0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAiJXUvJXUgbmFtZXMsICV1LyV1 IGVudHJpZXMsICIKLSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICJwdXJnZS9zY2FuPSV1 KCV1LCV1KS8ldSwgb3Zlcm1lbT0lZCIsCi0gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBh ZGIsICh1bnNpZ25lZCBsb25nKWlzY19tZW1faW51c2UoYWRiLT5tY3R4KSwKLSAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGFkYi0+bm5hbWUsIGFkYi0+bm5hbWVfdG90YWwsCi0gICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBhZGItPm5lbnRyeSwgYWRiLT5uZW50cnlfdG90YWwsCi0g ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBhZGItPnN0YWxlX3B1cmdlLCBhZGItPnN0YWxl X2V4cGlyZSwKLSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGFkYi0+c3RhbGVfbHJ1LCBh ZGItPnN0YWxlX3NjYW4sIGFkYi0+b3Zlcm1lbSk7Ci0gICAgICAgIH0KKwlpc2NfbG9nX3dyaXRl KGRuc19sY3R4LCBETlNfTE9HQ0FURUdPUllfREFUQUJBU0UsCisJCSAgICAgIEROU19MT0dNT0RV TEVfQURCLCBJU0NfTE9HX0lORk8sCisJCSAgICAgICJBREIgbWVtb3J5IHVzYWdlICVwOiBtZW0g aW51c2UgJWx1LCBvdmVybWVtPSVkIiwKKwkJICAgICAgYWRiLCAodW5zaWduZWQgbG9uZylpc2Nf bWVtX2ludXNlKGFkYi0+bWN0eCksCisJCSAgICAgIGFkYi0+b3Zlcm1lbSk7CiAKICAgICAgICAg aW50ZXJ2YWwuc2Vjb25kcyA9IERVTVBfSU5URVJWQUw7CiAgICAgICAgIGludGVydmFsLm5hbm9z ZWNvbmRzID0gMDsKSW5kZXg6IGxpYi9kbnMvY2FjaGUuYwo9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09ClJDUyBmaWxlOiAv cHJvai9jdnMvcHJvZC9iaW5kOS9saWIvZG5zL2NhY2hlLmMsdgpyZXRyaWV2aW5nIHJldmlzaW9u IDEuNzYKZGlmZiAtdSAtcjEuNzYgY2FjaGUuYwotLS0gbGliL2Rucy9jYWNoZS5jCTE5IE9jdCAy MDA3IDE3OjE1OjUzIC0wMDAwCTEuNzYKKysrIGxpYi9kbnMvY2FjaGUuYwkxMyBGZWIgMjAwOCAy MDozOTo1NyAtMDAwMApAQCAtNTUsNiArNTUsMTAgQEAKICAqLwogI2RlZmluZSBETlNfQ0FDSEVf Q0xFQU5FUklOQ1JFTUVOVCAgICAgIDEwMDBVICAgLyolPCBOdW1iZXIgb2Ygbm9kZXMuICovCiAK KyNpZm5kZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHMgorI2RlZmluZSBMUlVfREVCVUcyIDAKKyNlbmRpZgorCiAvKioq CiAgKioqICAgIFR5cGVzCiAgKioqLwpAQCAtMTI4LDcgKzEzMiw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgIGNoYXIg KiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGZpbGVuYW1lOwogICAgICAgICAvKiBBY2Nlc3MgdG8gdGhlIG9u LWRpc2sgY2FjaGUgZmlsZSBpcyBhbHNvIGxvY2tlZCBieSAnZmlsZWxvY2snLiAqLwogCi0jaWZk ZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHCisjaWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHMgogI2RlZmluZSBEVU1QX0lOVEVSVkFMIDMwICAg ICAgICAvKiBzZWNvbmRzICovCiAgICAgICAgIGlzY190aW1lcl90ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAqZHVtcF90aW1lcjsgLyogZm9yIHRlc3QgKi8KICAgICAgICAgaXNjX3RpbWVfdCAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICBkdW1wX3RpbWU7IC8qIGZvciB0ZXN0ICovCkBAIC0xNDksNyArMTUzLDcg QEAKIHN0YXRpYyB2b2lkCiBjbGVhbmVyX3NodXRkb3duX2FjdGlvbihpc2NfdGFza190ICp0YXNr LCBpc2NfZXZlbnRfdCAqZXZlbnQpOwogCi0jaWZkZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHCisjaWYgTFJVX0RFQlVH Mgogc3RhdGljIHZvaWQKIHRpbWVyX2R1bXAoaXNjX3Rhc2tfdCAqdGFzaywgaXNjX2V2ZW50X3Qg KmV2ZW50KTsKICNlbmRpZgpAQCAtNTQ4LDcgKzU1Miw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg aXNjX3RpbWVybWdyX3QgKnRpbWVybWdyLCBjYWNoZV9jbGVhbmVyX3QgKmNsZWFuZXIpCiB7CiAg ICAgICAgIGlzY19yZXN1bHRfdCByZXN1bHQ7Ci0jaWZkZWYgTFJVX0RFQlVHCisjaWYgTFJVX0RF QlVHMgogICAgICAgICBpc2NfaW50ZXJ2YWxfdCBpbnRlcnZhbDsKICNlbmRpZgogCkBAIC02MDAs NyArNjA0LDcgQEAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGdvdG8gY2xlYW51cDsKICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICB9CiAKLSNpZmRlZiBMUlVfREVCVUcKKyNpZiBMUlVfREVCVUcyCiAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgaW50ZXJ2YWwuc2Vjb25kcyA9IERVTVBfSU5URVJWQUw7CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgaW50ZXJ2YWwubmFub3NlY29uZHMgPSAwOwogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFJVTlRJTUVfQ0hF Q0soaXNjX3RpbWVfbm93cGx1c2ludGVydmFsKCZjYWNoZS0+ZHVtcF90aW1lLApAQCAtNzgwLDcg Kzc4NCw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgIGlmIChjYWNoZS0+Y2xlYW5lci5jbGVhbmluZ190aW1lciAhPSBO VUxMKQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGlzY190aW1lcl9kZXRhY2goJmNhY2hlLT5jbGVhbmVyLmNs ZWFuaW5nX3RpbWVyKTsKIAotI2lmZGVmIExSVV9ERUJVRworI2lmIExSVV9ERUJVRzIKICAgICAg ICAgaXNjX3RpbWVyX2RldGFjaCgmY2FjaGUtPmR1bXBfdGltZXIpOwogI2VuZGlmCiAKQEAgLTg3 Miw3ICs4NzYsNyBAQAogICAgICAgICByZXR1cm4gKHJlc3VsdCk7CiB9CiAKLSNpZmRlZiBMUlVf REVCVUcKKyNpZiBMUlVfREVCVUcyCiBzdGF0aWMgdm9pZAogdGltZXJfZHVtcChpc2NfdGFza190 ICp0YXNrLCBpc2NfZXZlbnRfdCAqZXZlbnQpIHsKICAgICAgICAgZG5zX2NhY2hlX3QgKmNhY2hl OwpAQCAtODg0LDcgKzg4OCw3IEBACiAgICAgICAgIGNhY2hlID0gZXZlbnQtPmV2X2FyZzsKICAg ICAgICAgSU5TSVNUKFZBTElEX0NBQ0hFKGNhY2hlKSk7CiAKLSNpZmRlZiBMUlVfREVCVUcKKyNp ZiBMUlVfREVCVUcyCiAgICAgICAgIC8qIFhYWDogYWJ1c2UgZXhpc3Rpbmcgb3Zlcm1lbSBtZXRo b2QgKi8KICAgICAgICAgZG5zX2RiX292ZXJtZW0oY2FjaGUtPmRiLCAoaXNjX2Jvb2xlYW5fdCkt MSk7CiAjZW5kaWYKSW5kZXg6IGxpYi9kbnMvcmJ0ZGIuYwo9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09ClJDUyBmaWxlOiAv cHJvai9jdnMvcHJvZC9iaW5kOS9saWIvZG5zL3JidGRiLmMsdgpyZXRyaWV2aW5nIHJldmlzaW9u IDEuMjQ4CmRpZmYgLXUgLXIxLjI0OCByYnRkYi5jCi0tLSBsaWIvZG5zL3JidGRiLmMJMiBEZWMg MjAwNyAyMDoyNzozNSAtMDAwMAkxLjI0OAorKysgbGliL2Rucy9yYnRkYi5jCTEzIEZlYiAyMDA4 IDIwOjM5OjU3IC0wMDAwCkBAIC0xNjMzLDcgKzE2MzMsOCBAQAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAiZGVjcmVtZW50X3JlZmVyZW5jZTogIgogICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAiZG5zX3JidF9kZWxldGVub2RlOiAlcyIsCiAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGlzY19yZXN1bHRfdG90ZXh0KHJlc3Vs dCkpOwotICAgICAgICB9IGVsc2UgaWYgKGRuc19yYnRub2RlX3JlZmN1cnJlbnQobm9kZSkgPT0g MCkgeworICAgICAgICB9IGVsc2UgaWYgKGRuc19yYnRub2RlX3JlZmN1cnJlbnQobm9kZSkgPT0g MCAmJgorCQkgICByYnRkYi0+ZGVhZG5vZGVzICE9IE5VTEwpIHsKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBJ TlNJU1QoIUlTQ19MSU5LX0xJTktFRChub2RlLCBkZWFkbGluaykpOwogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IElTQ19MSVNUX0FQUEVORChyYnRkYi0+ZGVhZG5vZGVzW2J1Y2tldF0sIG5vZGUsIGRlYWRsaW5r KTsKICAgICAgICAgfQpAQCAtMTkxNCw2ICsxOTE1LDE1IEBACiAgICAgICAgIH0KIAogICAgICAg ICBpZiAoIUVNUFRZKGNsZWFudXBfbGlzdCkpIHsKKwkJLyoKKwkJICogV2UgYWNxdWlyZSBhIHRy ZWUgd3JpdGUgbG9jayBoZXJlIGluIG9yZGVyIHRvIG1ha2Ugc3VyZQorCQkgKiB0aGF0IHN0YWxl IG5vZGVzIHdpbGwgYmUgcmVtb3ZlZCBpbiBkZWNyZW1lbnRfcmVmZXJlbmNlKCkuCisJCSAqIElm IHdlIGRpZG4ndCBoYXZlIHRoZSBsb2NrLCB0aG9zZSBub2RlcyBjb3VsZCBtaXNzIHRoZQorCQkg KiBjaGFuY2UgdG8gYmUgcmVtb3ZlZCB1bnRpbCB0aGUgc2VydmVyIHN0b3BzLiAgVGhlIHdyaXRl IGxvY2sKKwkJICogaXMgZXhwZW5zaXZlLCBidXQgdGhpcyBldmVudCBzaG91bGQgYmUgcmFyZSBl bm91Z2ggdG8ganVzdGlmeQorCQkgKiB0aGUgY29zdC4KKwkJICovCisJCVJXTE9DSygmcmJ0ZGIt PnRyZWVfbG9jaywgaXNjX3J3bG9ja3R5cGVfd3JpdGUpOwogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGZvciAo Y2hhbmdlZCA9IEhFQUQoY2xlYW51cF9saXN0KTsKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGNoYW5n ZWQgIT0gTlVMTDsKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIGNoYW5nZWQgPSBuZXh0X2NoYW5nZWQp IHsKQEAgLTE5MjgsMTIgKzE5MzgsMTMgQEAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgcm9sbGJhY2tfbm9kZShyYnRub2RlLCBzZXJpYWwpOwogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgZGVjcmVtZW50X3JlZmVyZW5jZShyYnRkYiwgcmJ0bm9kZSwgbGVhc3Rfc2VyaWFsLAogICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBpc2Nfcndsb2NrdHlwZV93 cml0ZSwKLSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgaXNjX3J3 bG9ja3R5cGVfbm9uZSk7CisgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgIGlzY19yd2xvY2t0eXBlX3dyaXRlKTsKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIE5PREVf VU5MT0NLKGxvY2ssIGlzY19yd2xvY2t0eXBlX3dyaXRlKTsKIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgaXNjX21lbV9wdXQocmJ0ZGItPmNvbW1vbi5tY3R4LCBjaGFuZ2VkLAogICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgc2l6ZW9mKCpjaGFuZ2VkKSk7CiAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgfQorCQlSV1VOTE9DSygmcmJ0ZGItPnRyZWVfbG9jaywgaXNjX3J3bG9ja3R5cGVfd3Jp dGUpOwogICAgICAgICB9CiAKICAgZW5kOgo= --Multipart_Wed_Feb_13_12:44:00_2008-1-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 10:07:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB7616A418 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:07:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from postfix1-g20.free.fr (postfix1-g20.free.fr [212.27.60.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A46113C457 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:07:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tataz@tataz.chchile.org) Received: from smtp5-g19.free.fr (smtp5-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.35]) by postfix1-g20.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94B1922A3EC9 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:45:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp5-g19.free.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp5-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4B983F61AA; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:45:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (tataz.chchile.org [82.233.239.98]) by smtp5-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327683F61B8; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:45:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from obiwan.tataz.chchile.org (unknown [192.168.1.25]) by tatooine.tataz.chchile.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 143E89BF12; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:40:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obiwan.tataz.chchile.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 06024405B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:40:12 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:40:12 +0100 From: Jeremie Le Hen To: Todorov Message-ID: <20080214094011.GA92006@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <47A79ADA.9050900@paladin.bulgarpress.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47A79ADA.9050900@paladin.bulgarpress.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP & HTT on 6.3 (P4) X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:07:02 -0000 Hi, On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 01:08:10AM +0200, Todorov wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > what do you think for HyperThreading (P4 GHz), which serves FBSD 6.3? > Now it's disabled by the BIOS but since today I've upgraded the machine > 5.5 to 6.3 though if under 6.XX series it worths or not. > > I've read for performance penalties under 5.XX series w/ HTT on. I'm not > going to change to ULE (it's said to be better for HTT awareness). ULE is broken on RELENG_6. Forget it. If you really want ULE, you'll have to upgrade to RELENG_7. Regarding HTT, I haven't heard of any performance improvement with HTT on FreeBSD. The scheduler have to be aware of it because HTT processors share the same cache lines (including L1). Unenlightened scheduling leads to an increase of cache miss (42% according [1]). This is not the case on any FreeBSD branch currently. Nonetheless Jeff Roberson is working on a CPU topology-aware scheduler implementation [2] but this is not even in -CURRENT yet. It will probably ends up in RELENG_8. Besides, Colin Percival has shown that HTT could lead to local information leak [3]. WRT to these informations, I advice you to disable HTT. Regards, [1] http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2006/08/02/arm-is-no-fan-of-hyperthreading [2] http://jeffr-tech.livejournal.com/17426.html [3] http://www.daemonology.net/hyperthreading-considered-harmful/ -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 10:25:51 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C6516A421 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:25:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC0B913C4E3; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:25:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B4172D.3040307@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:25:49 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremie Le Hen References: <47A79ADA.9050900@paladin.bulgarpress.com> <20080214094011.GA92006@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <20080214094011.GA92006@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Todorov , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP & HTT on 6.3 (P4) X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:25:52 -0000 Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 01:08:10AM +0200, Todorov wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi, >> what do you think for HyperThreading (P4 GHz), which serves FBSD 6.3? >> Now it's disabled by the BIOS but since today I've upgraded the machine >> 5.5 to 6.3 though if under 6.XX series it worths or not. >> >> I've read for performance penalties under 5.XX series w/ HTT on. I'm not >> going to change to ULE (it's said to be better for HTT awareness). > > ULE is broken on RELENG_6. Forget it. If you really want ULE, you'll > have to upgrade to RELENG_7. > > Regarding HTT, I haven't heard of any performance improvement with HTT > on FreeBSD. The scheduler have to be aware of it because HTT processors > share the same cache lines (including L1). Unenlightened scheduling > leads to an increase of cache miss (42% according [1]). This is not the > case on any FreeBSD branch currently. Nonetheless Jeff Roberson is > working on a CPU topology-aware scheduler implementation [2] but this is > not even in -CURRENT yet. It will probably ends up in RELENG_8. Actually with ULE in 7.0 it often seems to help on the workloads I have tested. This is probably because ULE has much better CPU affinity so processes don't bounce around between CPU threads so much. The bottom line with HTT has really always been: try it on your workload and measure whether or not it helps. Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 16:56:28 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA46416A46C for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:56:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stas@ht-systems.ru) Received: from smtp.ht-systems.ru (mr0.ht-systems.ru [78.110.50.55]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8490013C461 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:56:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stas@ht-systems.ru) Received: from [78.110.49.49] (helo=quasar.ht-systems.ru) by smtp.ht-systems.ru with esmtpa (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1JPgys-0000DK-Iq; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:30:38 +0300 Received: by quasar.ht-systems.ru (Postfix, from userid 1024) id 703267D1002; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:30:37 +0300 (MSK) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:30:37 +0300 From: Stanislav Sedov To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Message-ID: <20080214163037.GA51014@dracon.ht-systems.ru> References: <479B1185.8020604@quip.cz> <479D89C9.7060300@chistydom.ru> <479DD94C.7010409@mawer.org> <479DE578.7060202@quip.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <479DE578.7060202@quip.cz> Organization: The FreeBSD Project X-Voice: +7 916 849 20 23 X-XMPP: ssedov@jabber.ru X-Yahoo: stanislav_sedov X-PGP-Fingerprint: F21E D6CC 5626 9609 6CE2 A385 2BF5 5993 EB26 9581 X-University: MEPhI X-Mailer: carrier-pigeon X-Operating-System: FreeBSD quasar.ht-systems.ru 7.0-BETA2 FreeBSD 7.0-BETA2 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Antony Mawer , Alexey Popov Subject: Re: PHP with open_basedir performance problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:56:28 -0000 On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 03:23:52PM +0100 Miroslav Lachman mentioned: > > Does somebody have any other ideas? > I'd suggest you to disable open_basedir at all or roll out specialized implementation. I had a lot of similar problems with open_basedir in the past, so I just rewrote it to match our specific security policy. Most basedir problems are linked with the fact it produce a lot of lstast/ readlinks on every require, include or open command. On Linux it pereforms even worse, as they implemented readlink there by hand, and, of course, their implementation isn't particulry good. I don't thinks this problem could be solved with PHP guys, taking in account the fact that a simple bug report with the patch usually result in two weeks of formal replies like "it's not a bug, it's a feature". Not speaking about they desicover new bugs in basedir every couple of days. -- Stanislav Sedov ST4096-RIPE From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 17:52:00 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156C216A41B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:52:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arkadi@mebius.lv) Received: from trap.mebius.lv (trap.mebius.lv [80.81.43.194]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D80BA13C4E3; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:51:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arkadi@mebius.lv) Received: from [10.0.10.50] by trap.mebius.lv with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JPhmf-00029y-MV; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:22:05 +0200 Message-ID: <47B478E6.8080902@mebius.lv> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:22:46 +0200 From: Arkadi Shishlov User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: <479B1185.8020604@quip.cz> <479D89C9.7060300@chistydom.ru> <479DD94C.7010409@mawer.org> <479DE578.7060202@quip.cz> <20080214163037.GA51014@dracon.ht-systems.ru> In-Reply-To: <20080214163037.GA51014@dracon.ht-systems.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stanislav Sedov Subject: Re: PHP with open_basedir performance problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:52:00 -0000 Stanislav Sedov wrote: > I'd suggest you to disable open_basedir at all or roll out specialized > implementation. I had a lot of similar problems with open_basedir in > the past, so I just rewrote it to match our specific security policy. Can you share a hint how exactly this specialized implementation may look like? The requirement is simple: php script working under apache mod_php can't open files outside of virtual host document root whenever php safe mode is enabled or disabled. Website owners can create symlinks. I understand the open_basedir is kinda flawed security measure, and safe_mode is a primary safeguard with mod_php, but it would be nice to get it working under FreeBSD too. > Most basedir problems are linked with the fact it produce a lot of lstast/ > readlinks on every require, include or open command. On Linux it pereforms > even worse, as they implemented readlink there by hand, and, of course, > their implementation isn't particulry good. But there is no high sys cpu usage on Linux in contrary to FreeBSD, as reported by original author of the thread..? Do you have numbers or benchmark ready? I see the number of syscalls required is astonishing (on Linux) but doesn't cause any problem at first look. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 19:35:22 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4032316A419 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:35:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17C4F13C459 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:35:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1EJMj2I075367 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:22:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1EJMjuE075364 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:22:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:22:45 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:35:22 -0000 I've recently upgraded a mailserver from a 4.x version to 6.2. This server had been upgraded a few years ago to 5.x but the performance was so bad that we only let it run a few days before moving it back to 4.x. Years pass and it seemed time once again to move forward. What is the magic bullet in getting the same kind of performance out of a 5.x or 6.x version that I've just come to expect from FreeBSD ever since version 1? I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before) network errors, serious response time errors and generally poor performance during peak activity (same box, same people). ufs memory looks exactly like it did before and doesn't max: vfs.ufs.dirhash_minsize: 2560 vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem: 2097152 vfs.ufs.dirhash_mem: 1923157 vfs.ufs.dirhash_docheck: 0 mbufs hasn't changed: 536/604/1140 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) and disk performance is very good EXCEPT during peak activity: -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mail Server (Dual Xeon P4 3mhz 2g memory [Perc] U320): -bash-2.05b$ time dd if=/dev/zero bs=1024k of=tstfile2 count=1024 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 47.037099 secs (22827552 bytes/sec) real 0m47.041s user 0m0.000s sys 0m5.444s -bash-2.05b$ time dd if=tstfile2 bs=1024k of=/dev/null 1024+0 records in 1024+0 records out 1073741824 bytes transferred in 2213.643946 secs (485056 bytes/sec) real 36m53.647s <---Check it out. user 0m0.008s sys 0m3.619s -------------------------------------------------------------------- I've changed the order of php extensions, disabled autonegotiation, moved mail queues and large volume directory folders to separate drives and set noatime. Nothing seems to make much of an impact. My next idea was to setup my kernel for device_polling, but none of this is really diagnosing what the real problem is. Any clues? Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 19:42:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C9816A417 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:42:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [64.7.153.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 520AF13C442 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:42:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m1EJgrO1053021; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:42:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m1EJgrKD079291 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:42:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200802141942.m1EJgrKD079291@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:43:09 -0500 To: Brett Bump , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:42:54 -0000 At 02:22 PM 2/14/2008, Brett Bump wrote: >I've recently upgraded a mailserver from a 4.x version to 6.2. I would say move to 6.3R as its a better release with a lot of bug fixes. In terms of your general performance issues, choice of hardware really makes a difference as quality of drivers can be an issue. You might have a really awesome controller that works well on Windows or LINUX, but does not do so well under FreeBSD because there isnt any good driver support for it. >I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before) Did you do a fresh install or did you try and migrate from RELENG_4 to RELENG_6 ? What network card are you using ? What are the errors (CRC?). How about a dmesg from the box. ---Mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 19:44:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906AD16A41A for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:44:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF80F13C455; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:44:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:44:22 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Bump References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:44:24 -0000 Brett Bump wrote: > I've changed the order of php extensions, disabled autonegotiation, > moved mail queues and large volume directory folders to separate > drives and set noatime. Nothing seems to make much of an impact. > My next idea was to setup my kernel for device_polling, but none of > this is really diagnosing what the real problem is. Any clues? We are going to need more information about your system. What do you mean by "peak activity"? What is running on the system when it performs badly (check top -S, ps, gstat, vmstat -w, vmstat -i). What is your kernel configuration, dmesg and relevant aspects of the system configuration? Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 20:09:13 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D2B16A41B for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:09:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0186E13C4F2 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:09:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1EK9B9Z075618; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:09:11 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1EK9BSc075615; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:09:11 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:09:11 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <200802141942.m1EJgrKD079291@lava.sentex.ca> Message-ID: <20080214124929.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <200802141942.m1EJgrKD079291@lava.sentex.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:09:13 -0000 On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 02:22 PM 2/14/2008, Brett Bump wrote: > > >I've recently upgraded a mailserver from a 4.x version to 6.2. > > I would say move to 6.3R as its a better release with a lot of bug > fixes. In terms of your general performance issues, choice of > hardware really makes a difference as quality of drivers can be an > issue. You might have a really awesome controller that works well on > Windows or LINUX, but does not do so well under FreeBSD because there > isnt any good driver support for it. Again, that isn't diagnosing the problem as much as just saying that 5.0 through 6.2 were all bad releases??? I doubt that can be the case. Why would the driver support for this machine (working FLAWLESSLY on 4.10) now have bad drivers (this machine has been running 4.x for 4 years). > >I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before) > > Did you do a fresh install or did you try and migrate from RELENG_4 > to RELENG_6 ? What network card are you using ? What are the errors > (CRC?). How about a dmesg from the box. > > ---Mike > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > Fresh install ALWAYS (no migrate, I never go that route). bge0: Broadcom BCM5704 A2, ASIC rev. 0x2002 bge1: Broadcom BCM5704 A2, ASIC rev. 0x2002 -bash-2.05b$ dmesg pid 31611 (milter-greylist), uid 25: exited on signal 3 pid 43464 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 86995 (imapd), uid 2151: exited on signal 6 pid 85706 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 87600 (imapd), uid 1376: exited on signal 6 pid 45621 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 45617 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 The greylist entry is a standard 3am cron restart. Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 20:23:22 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97B516A419 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:23:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00BA713C455; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:23:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B4A338.2070504@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:23:20 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Bump References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <200802141942.m1EJgrKD079291@lava.sentex.ca> <20080214124929.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080214124929.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:23:22 -0000 Brett Bump wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> At 02:22 PM 2/14/2008, Brett Bump wrote: >> >>> I've recently upgraded a mailserver from a 4.x version to 6.2. >> I would say move to 6.3R as its a better release with a lot of bug >> fixes. In terms of your general performance issues, choice of >> hardware really makes a difference as quality of drivers can be an >> issue. You might have a really awesome controller that works well on >> Windows or LINUX, but does not do so well under FreeBSD because there >> isnt any good driver support for it. > > Again, that isn't diagnosing the problem as much as just saying that 5.0 > through 6.2 were all bad releases??? I doubt that can be the case. Why > would the driver support for this machine (working FLAWLESSLY on 4.10) > now have bad drivers (this machine has been running 4.x for 4 years). All it takes is a single bug (e.g. in a driver) to affect performance on a certain specific configuration. However, bugs tend to get fixed over time. Maybe that is the case for you. It is well worth verifying whether the problem persists on the most up-to-date sources, so that everyone's time is not wasted in tracking down a problem that is already fixed. You can just do a source upgrade from 6.2, which will be quite straightforward. > bge0: Broadcom BCM5704 A2, ASIC rev. 0x2002 > bge1: Broadcom BCM5704 A2, ASIC rev. 0x2002 > > -bash-2.05b$ dmesg > pid 31611 (milter-greylist), uid 25: exited on signal 3 > pid 43464 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 > pid 86995 (imapd), uid 2151: exited on signal 6 > pid 85706 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 > pid 87600 (imapd), uid 1376: exited on signal 6 > pid 45621 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 > pid 45617 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 > > The greylist entry is a standard 3am cron restart. It is pretty unusual for applications to be aborting, but usually they do it because they fail an application-specific run-time check. What diagnostics are logged by the applications? You may need to increase their respective verbosity/debug levels. Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 20:24:11 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 991B616A468 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:24:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost2.sentex.ca (smarthost2.sentex.ca [205.211.164.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B56C13C455 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:24:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost2.sentex.ca (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m1EKOA1R089881; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:24:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m1EKO9QY079465 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:24:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200802142024.m1EKO9QY079465@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:24:25 -0500 To: Brett Bump From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <20080214124929.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <200802141942.m1EJgrKD079291@lava.sentex.ca> <20080214124929.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:24:11 -0000 At 03:09 PM 2/14/2008, Brett Bump wrote: >On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > At 02:22 PM 2/14/2008, Brett Bump wrote: > > > > >I've recently upgraded a mailserver from a 4.x version to 6.2. > > > > I would say move to 6.3R as its a better release with a lot of bug > > fixes. In terms of your general performance issues, choice of > > hardware really makes a difference as quality of drivers can be an > > issue. You might have a really awesome controller that works well on > > Windows or LINUX, but does not do so well under FreeBSD because there > > isnt any good driver support for it. > >Again, that isn't diagnosing the problem as much as just saying that 5.0 >through 6.2 were all bad releases??? No, but you havent given the list much to go on as to what the problems are or what hardware you are using, or really quantified the issue. By "slow" is the disk blocking on IO ? or are processes blocking on network IO etc etc. 6.2 was not a "bad" release, but 6.3 is better than 6.2. By starting with a more contemporary release, less effort by developers and other users need to be exerted in figuring out if the problem(s) you are running into have already been fixed. >I doubt that can be the case. Why >would the driver support for this machine (working FLAWLESSLY on 4.10) >now have bad drivers (this machine has been running 4.x for 4 years). Because the drivers have changed since 4.10. "improvements" could have introduced regressions... Change in the driver to support newer versions of a chipset might break older chipsets. > > >I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before) > > > > Did you do a fresh install or did you try and migrate from RELENG_4 > > to RELENG_6 ? What network card are you using ? What are the errors > > (CRC?). How about a dmesg from the box. > >bge0: Broadcom BCM5704 A2, ASIC rev. 0x2002 >bge1: Broadcom BCM5704 A2, ASIC rev. 0x2002 bge is a good example of a driver that has had a lot of changes and hasnt worked all that well at times.... hence the suggestion to try 6.3 as there have been many bug fixes. Whether or not it fixes your problem its hard to say, but start there to see if things are faster and stable for you etc. e.g. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c You should also post a full dmesg of the box as well as kernel config etc... what does netstat -ni give and what options do you have on ifconfig ? Are the errors seen on your switch port as well or just in netstat -ni ? >-bash-2.05b$ dmesg >pid 31611 (milter-greylist), uid 25: exited on signal 3 >pid 43464 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 >pid 86995 (imapd), uid 2151: exited on signal 6 >pid 85706 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 >pid 87600 (imapd), uid 1376: exited on signal 6 >pid 45621 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 >pid 45617 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 > >The greylist entry is a standard 3am cron restart. Why are the processes sigabrting ? Is there anything in the application logs to indicate why they are exiting ? ---Mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 20:26:19 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC16616A469 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:26:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@collaborativefusion.com) Received: from mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com (mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.199]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70AC213C513 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:26:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@collaborativefusion.com) Received: from vanquish.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (vanquish.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com [192.168.2.162]) (SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by wingspan with esmtp; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:16:15 -0500 id 0005642D.47B4A18F.00013798 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:16:14 -0500 From: Bill Moran To: Brett Bump Message-Id: <20080214151614.7fa0c091.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> Organization: Collaborative Fusion X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:26:19 -0000 In response to Brett Bump : > > I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before) > network errors, serious response time errors and generally poor > performance during peak activity (same box, same people). IIRC, signal 6 is an indicator that you've compiled binaries that are almost, but not quite compatible with your CPU. If this machine has been 4.X for a while, it's probably old hardware. Make sure you're using the correct CPU definition in your kernel config and in your make configuration. What _is_ the hardware? -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ wmoran@collaborativefusion.com Phone: 412-422-3463x4023 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 22:27:31 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D711F16A41A for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:27:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A65A313C45B for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:27:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1EMRU11076211; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:30 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1EMRTuu076208; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:30 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:29 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:27:32 -0000 On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: > We are going to need more information about your system. What do you > mean by "peak activity"? What is running on the system when it performs > badly (check top -S, ps, gstat, vmstat -w, vmstat -i). What is your > kernel configuration, dmesg and relevant aspects of the system > configuration? > > Kris > I would call 120 processes with a load average of 0.03 and 99.9 idle with 10-20 sendmail processes and 30 apache jobs nothing to write home about. But when that jumps to 250 processes, a load average of 30 with 50% idle (5-10 second waits on single character ssh echo) a bit busy. That usually means my heavy pop3 users are checking in at the same time someone (or 2 or 3) have sent email to the large volume listservs. Proc stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). Kernel is generic with ipfirewall quota and smp (no ipfw rules yet). On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Bill Moran wrote: > What _is_ the hardware? Dell PowerEdge 1750 1U, 146Gig U320s. The Broadcoms seem to be a change from the earlier 1550s with intel pro/100s (I prefer the intel's). On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: > All it takes is a single bug (e.g. in a driver) to affect performance on > a certain specific configuration. However, bugs tend to get fixed over > time. Maybe that is the case for you. It is well worth verifying > whether the problem persists on the most up-to-date sources, so that > everyone's time is not wasted in tracking down a problem that is already > fixed. You can just do a source upgrade from 6.2, which will be quite > straightforward. Agreed. I have a 2nd machine that is identical to this one I could put 6.3 on to test this. > It is pretty unusual for applications to be aborting, but usually they > do it because they fail an application-specific run-time check. What > diagnostics are logged by the applications? You may need to increase > their respective verbosity/debug levels. > > Kris > I was suspicious that maybe we needed more memory but swap has barely even been touched (232k used...with 1400meg inactive). On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: > No, but you havent given the list much to go on as to what the > problems are or what hardware you are using, or really quantified the > issue. By "slow" is the disk blocking on IO ? or are processes > blocking on network IO etc etc. 6.2 was not a "bad" release, but 6.3 > is better than 6.2. By starting with a more contemporary release, > less effort by developers and other users need to be exerted in > figuring out if the problem(s) you are running into have already been > fixed. It appears to me that disk access is extremely slow. I can transfer large files between the machines faster than making a duplicate copy on disk. > Because the drivers have changed since 4.10. "improvements" could > have introduced regressions... Change in the driver to support newer > versions of a chipset might break older chipsets. Any known issues with the Dell PERC RAID driver that anyone is aware of? I can start there. > bge is a good example of a driver that has had a lot of changes and > hasnt worked all that well at times.... hence the suggestion to try > 6.3 as there have been many bug fixes. Whether or not it fixes your > problem its hard to say, but start there to see if things are faster > and stable for you etc. > e.g. > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c > > You should also post a full dmesg of the box as well as kernel config > etc... There kernel is generic with ipfirewall, quota and smp. Feb 14 02:53:37 mail sm-mta[33143]: m1E9qKLZ033143: SYSERR(root): collect: I/O error on connection from astro.pryor.com, from=pid 31611 (milter-greylist), uid 25: exited on signal 3 Feb 14 03:17:08 mail sshd[34844]: warning: /etc/hosts.allow, line 45: can't verify hostname: getaddrinfo(host-200-6-102-230.iia.cl, AF_INET) failed Feb 14 03:17:08 mail sshd[34844]: refused connect from 200.6.102.230 (200.6.102.230) Feb 14 03:36:30 mail sshd[35944]: refused connect from 202.129.44.218 (202.129.44.218) Feb 14 03:45:21 mail sshd[36667]: refused connect from 202.129.44.218 (202.129.44.218) Feb 14 03:52:01 mail sm-mta[33092]: m1E9peX3033092: SYSERR(root): collect: read timeout on connection from astro.pryor.com, from= Feb 14 07:24:01 mail sshd[52723]: warning: /etc/hosts.allow, line 45: can't verify hostname: getaddrinfo(42.215.6.200.intelnet.net.gt, AF_INET) failed Feb 14 07:24:01 mail sshd[52723]: refused connect from 200.6.215.42 (200.6.215.42) Feb 14 07:28:56 mail sm-mta[52866]: m1EEPPLC052866: SYSERR(root): collect: I/O error on connection from astro.pryor.com, from= Feb 14 07:29:15 mail sshd[53465]: warning: /etc/hosts.allow, line 45: can't verify hostname: getaddrinfo(42.215.6.200.intelnet.net.gt, AF_INET) failed Feb 14 07:29:15 mail sshd[53465]: refused connect from 200.6.215.42 (200.6.215.42) Feb 14 08:01:57 mail sshd[58183]: refused connect from mail.rsib.net (12.46.46.98) Feb 14 08:07:22 mail sshd[59017]: refused connect from mail.rsib.net (12.46.46.98) Feb 14 09:50:00 mail su: bbump to root on /dev/ttyp0 pid 43464 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 86995 (imapd), uid 2151: exited on signal 6 pid 85706 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 87600 (imapd), uid 1376: exited on signal 6 pid 45621 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 45617 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 Feb 14 11:28:36 mail inetd[48076]: imap4 from 208.107.161.82 exceeded counts/min (limit 60/min) Feb 14 11:28:38 mail last message repeated 2 times Feb 14 11:52:34 mail sm-mta[99563]: m1EHqX9u099563: SYSERR(root): collect: read timeout on connection from fulltimeconsult.com, from= Feb 14 13:06:27 mail su: bbump to root on /dev/ttyp0 pid 45995 (imapd), uid 3115: exited on signal 6 pid 46407 (imapd), uid 1873: exited on signal 6 pid 46418 (imapd), uid 2769: exited on signal 6 pid 46402 (imapd), uid 1873: exited on signal 6 pid 46651 (imapd), uid 2769: exited on signal 6 pid 46653 (imapd), uid 2769: exited on signal 6 pid 44499 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 47035 (imapd), uid 1873: exited on signal 6 pid 46083 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 46395 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 46604 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 pid 46603 (httpd), uid 80: exited on signal 6 > what does > netstat -ni > give -bash-2.05b$ netstat -ni Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Coll bge0 1500 00:0f:1f:66:0e:e6 12511748 902 12025487 0 0 bge0 1500 208.107.160/2 208.107.161.82 17011211 - 16533277 - - bge1 1500 00:0f:1f:66:0e:e8 3523091 586 4089056 0 0 bge1 1500 10.1.1/24 10.1.1.1 3516790 - 4087415 - - lo0 16384 4659734 0 4659733 0 0 lo0 16384 fe80:3::1/64 fe80:3::1 0 - 0 - - lo0 16384 ::1/128 ::1 2772 - 2772 - - lo0 16384 127 127.0.0.1 147255 - 147255 - - > and what options do you have on ifconfig ? Are the errors seen on > your switch port as well or just in netstat -ni ? ifconfig_bge0="inet 208.107.161.82 netmask 255.255.254.0 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" ifconfig_bge1="inet 10.1.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" No, the switch shows clear, they only show up as input errors on this box. The box sitting under this one has an uptime of 621 days with 1 Oerr. > Why are the processes sigabrting ? Is there anything in the > application logs to indicate why they are exiting ? > > ---Mike > [Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort trap (6) httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call [Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort trap (6) httpd in free(): error: recursive call [Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort trap (6) httpd in free(): error: recursive call Memory. This is why I was willing to throw another 2gig of memory in it, but why am I only seeing 268K of swap used? Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 22:48:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DAE316A420 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:48:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ghelmer@palisadesys.com) Received: from cetus.palisadesys.com (cetus.palisadesys.com [205.237.115.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08A1813C45E for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:48:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ghelmer@palisadesys.com) Received: from magellan.palisadesys.com (serverwatch [172.16.1.98]) by cetus.palisadesys.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m1EMX6DY083230; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:33:06 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ghelmer@palisadesys.com) Received: from [172.16.2.112] (cetus.palisadesys.com [205.237.115.21]) (authenticated bits=0) by magellan.palisadesys.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m1EMX3ov014674 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:33:03 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ghelmer@palisadesys.com) Message-ID: <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:33:03 -0600 From: Guy Helmer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Bump References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (magellan.palisadesys.com [205.237.115.20]); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:33:03 -0600 (CST) X-Palisade-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Palisade-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Palisade-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-4.399, required 6, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-Palisade-MailScanner-From: ghelmer@palisadesys.com Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:48:02 -0000 Brett Bump wrote: > [Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort trap (6) > httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call > [Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort trap (6) > httpd in free(): error: recursive call > [Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort trap (6) > httpd in free(): error: recursive call > Do you have a mix of modules that are both multi-threaded and single-threaded loaded in Apache? I'm not sure what else could be a root cause for this particularly nasty problem. Guy -- Guy Helmer, Ph.D. Chief System Architect Palisade Systems, Inc. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 22:54:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 651FA16A418 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:54:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8F513C44B for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:54:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1EMsVF5076311; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:54:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1EMsVeb076308; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:54:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:54:31 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: Guy Helmer In-Reply-To: <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> Message-ID: <20080214154528.N75492@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:54:32 -0000 On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Guy Helmer wrote: > Brett Bump wrote: > > [Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort trap (6) > > httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call > > [Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort trap (6) > > httpd in free(): error: recursive call > > [Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort trap (6) > > httpd in free(): error: recursive call > > > Do you have a mix of modules that are both multi-threaded and > single-threaded loaded in Apache? > > I'm not sure what else could be a root cause for this particularly nasty > problem. > > Guy > > -- > Guy Helmer, Ph.D. > Chief System Architect > Palisade Systems, Inc. > Running apache_1.3.37 with php5 (about as generic as I can get). Here is the php extensions.ini file: extension=ctype.so extension=dom.so extension=ftp.so extension=gd.so extension=gettext.so extension=iconv.so extension=pcre.so extension=zlib.so extension=pdo.so extension=posix.so extension=session.so extension=simplexml.so extension=sqlite.so extension=tokenizer.so extension=xml.so extension=xmlreader.so extension=xmlwriter.so extension=mysql.so extension=imap.so extension=sockets.so On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Steven Hartland wrote: > Are you running any php on your machine? If so did you upgrade php as > well from say 5.1.x => 5.2.x and make use of open_basedir is so > the following thread may be interest:- > PHP with open_basedir performance problem > > Regards > Steve NO---That I did not do. I installed 5.1 directly from 6.2 ports. I also have another server running php5.1 however it is running apache2.2 so this might be something I can check (heading there now...thanks). Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 22:56:29 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EED0A16A417; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:56:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=1930867aa0=killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from mail1.multiplay.co.uk (core6.multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.23]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE9213C447; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:56:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=1930867aa0=killing@multiplay.co.uk) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=multiplay.co.uk; s=Multiplay; t=1203029163; x=1203633963; q=dns/txt; h=Received: Message-ID:From:To:Cc:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=D52AVzftNut5nWZ7B4y1m lBcpg17bDt557SR08XGyE0=; b=qCWdTci3hD/2d4I4w7xPsxhtwaDUMJasY63G2 CypU+SQiuERnzMyPTugqJDIx5m5/Qqsca7Z/lvYK2UEHAIBtdWAUINHRjGWERIhZ s3kvXuoZtmGB7Sf/6LPJsL00p2UEYiXBkmYitQj/1PYjPtiLCNs26mDbsRJjs72J RP+2FQ= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on mail1.multiplay.co.uk X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.7 required=6.0 tests=BAYES_00, USER_IN_WHITELIST, USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO autolearn=ham version=3.1.8 Received: from r2d2 by mail1.multiplay.co.uk (MDaemon PRO v9.6.3) with ESMTP id md50005069681.msg; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:46:01 +0000 Message-ID: <009f01c86f5b$5e455bd0$b6db87d4@multiplay.co.uk> From: "Steven Hartland" To: "Brett Bump" , "Kris Kennaway" References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org><47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:45:58 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: Killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDRemoteIP: 212.135.219.182 X-Return-Path: prvs=1930867aa0=killing@multiplay.co.uk X-Envelope-From: killing@multiplay.co.uk X-Spam-Processed: mail1.multiplay.co.uk, Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:46:02 +0000 X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.multiplay.co.uk, Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:46:03 +0000 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:56:30 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brett Bump" > I would call 120 processes with a load average of 0.03 and 99.9 idle > with 10-20 sendmail processes and 30 apache jobs nothing to write home > about. But when that jumps to 250 processes, a load average of 30 with > 50% idle (5-10 second waits on single character ssh echo) a bit busy. > That usually means my heavy pop3 users are checking in at the same time > someone (or 2 or 3) have sent email to the large volume listservs. Proc > stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my > drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi > tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). Are you running any php on your machine? If so did you upgrade php as well from say 5.1.x => 5.2.x and make use of open_basedir is so the following thread may be interest:- PHP with open_basedir performance problem Regards Steve ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 23:39:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C954F16A41A for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:39:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3089713C458; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:39:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:39:37 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Bump References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:39:40 -0000 Brett Bump wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> We are going to need more information about your system. What do you >> mean by "peak activity"? What is running on the system when it performs >> badly (check top -S, ps, gstat, vmstat -w, vmstat -i). What is your >> kernel configuration, dmesg and relevant aspects of the system >> configuration? >> >> Kris >> > > I would call 120 processes with a load average of 0.03 and 99.9 idle > with 10-20 sendmail processes and 30 apache jobs nothing to write home > about. But when that jumps to 250 processes, a load average of 30 with > 50% idle (5-10 second waits on single character ssh echo) a bit busy. > That usually means my heavy pop3 users are checking in at the same time > someone (or 2 or 3) have sent email to the large volume listservs. Proc > stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my > drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi > tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). > > Kernel is generic with ipfirewall quota and smp (no ipfw rules yet). OK, then you definitely need to update to 6.3, quota support in older releases had performance problems. > [Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort trap (6) > httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call > [Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort trap (6) > httpd in free(): error: recursive call > [Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort trap (6) > httpd in free(): error: recursive call These typically indicate application errors, or errors in how the applications are compiled (e.g. linked to inconsistent sets of libraries). Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 23:45:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9072B16A41B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:45:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB2AE13C447; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:45:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B4D27C.9010503@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:45:00 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Brett Bump , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:45:02 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > Brett Bump wrote: >> >> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: >> >>> We are going to need more information about your system. What do you >>> mean by "peak activity"? What is running on the system when it performs >>> badly (check top -S, ps, gstat, vmstat -w, vmstat -i). What is your >>> kernel configuration, dmesg and relevant aspects of the system >>> configuration? >>> >>> Kris >>> >> >> I would call 120 processes with a load average of 0.03 and 99.9 idle >> with 10-20 sendmail processes and 30 apache jobs nothing to write home >> about. But when that jumps to 250 processes, a load average of 30 with >> 50% idle (5-10 second waits on single character ssh echo) a bit busy. >> That usually means my heavy pop3 users are checking in at the same time >> someone (or 2 or 3) have sent email to the large volume listservs. Proc >> stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my >> drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi >> tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). >> >> Kernel is generic with ipfirewall quota and smp (no ipfw rules yet). > > OK, then you definitely need to update to 6.3, quota support in older > releases had performance problems. Actually I am not sure it was possible to merge it to 6.x, it is definitely in 7.0 though. Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 00:01:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CBDD16A419 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:01:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from outN.internet-mail-service.net (outN.internet-mail-service.net [216.240.47.237]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5170913C461 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:01:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from mx0.idiom.com (HELO idiom.com) (216.240.32.160) by out.internet-mail-service.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:01:23 -0800 Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7E6412721C; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:01:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47B4D654.4070503@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:01:24 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Brett Bump , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:01:24 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > Brett Bump wrote: >> >> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: >> >>> We are going to need more information about your system. What do you >>> mean by "peak activity"? What is running on the system when it performs >>> badly (check top -S, ps, gstat, vmstat -w, vmstat -i). What is your >>> kernel configuration, dmesg and relevant aspects of the system >>> configuration? >>> >>> Kris >>> >> >> I would call 120 processes with a load average of 0.03 and 99.9 idle >> with 10-20 sendmail processes and 30 apache jobs nothing to write home >> about. But when that jumps to 250 processes, a load average of 30 with >> 50% idle (5-10 second waits on single character ssh echo) a bit busy. >> That usually means my heavy pop3 users are checking in at the same time >> someone (or 2 or 3) have sent email to the large volume listservs. Proc >> stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my >> drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi >> tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). >> >> Kernel is generic with ipfirewall quota and smp (no ipfw rules yet). > > OK, then you definitely need to update to 6.3, quota support in older > releases had performance problems. > >> [Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort >> trap (6) >> httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call >> [Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort >> trap (6) >> httpd in free(): error: recursive call >> [Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort >> trap (6) >> httpd in free(): error: recursive call > typically a printf() in a signal handler... > These typically indicate application errors, or errors in how the > applications are compiled (e.g. linked to inconsistent sets of libraries). > > Kris > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 01:29:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F8C716A418 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:29:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gemini@geminix.org) Received: from geminix.org (geminix.org [213.73.82.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF0513C43E for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:29:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gemini@geminix.org) Message-ID: <47B4E0A6.3010205@geminix.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:45:26 +0100 From: Uwe Doering Organization: Private UNIX Site User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080129 SeaMonkey/1.1.8 (Ubuntu-1.1.8+nobinonly-0ubuntu1) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Bump References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> <20080214154528.N75492@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080214154528.N75492@mail.rsts.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from gemini by geminix.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1JPohk-0005L4-M6; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 02:29:53 +0100 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Guy Helmer Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:29:54 -0000 Brett Bump wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Guy Helmer wrote: > >> Brett Bump wrote: >>> [Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort trap (6) >>> httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call >>> [Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort trap (6) >>> httpd in free(): error: recursive call >>> [Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort trap (6) >>> httpd in free(): error: recursive call >>> >> Do you have a mix of modules that are both multi-threaded and >> single-threaded loaded in Apache? >> >> I'm not sure what else could be a root cause for this particularly nasty >> problem. >> >> Guy > > Running apache_1.3.37 with php5 (about as generic as I can get). Here is > the php extensions.ini file: > > extension=ctype.so > extension=dom.so > extension=ftp.so > extension=gd.so > extension=gettext.so > extension=iconv.so > extension=pcre.so > extension=zlib.so > extension=pdo.so > extension=posix.so > extension=session.so > extension=simplexml.so > extension=sqlite.so > extension=tokenizer.so > extension=xml.so > extension=xmlreader.so > extension=xmlwriter.so > extension=mysql.so > extension=imap.so > extension=sockets.so Have you tried sorting this list alphabetically? Believe it or not, when I tried to use Apache 1.3.x with PHP 5.2.x with extensions in arbitrary order I got inexplicable crashes, too. Now, of course it was just a coincidence that it worked for me after sorting the extension list. What this in fact points to is that the order of extensions can be important in that list, for whatever reason. For me it worked after sorting the list, but YMMV. Might be worth a try, though. Regards, Uwe -- Uwe Doering | EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers gemini@geminix.org | http://www.escapebox.net From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 04:07:48 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2A4316A417 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:07:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.231]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D72013C43E for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:07:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i29so540288wxd.7 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:07:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=Mfo+DYJbgCrH9XJg0egNnde4oqnMzXQDBxnJbX4/dLY=; b=AaOnR9NZejBAAESDSHIV4HgFdFUCI6L9mOh465xZXGDXCO7b6jkn0stA8KehPuCSWmJX0xcV4NJ3sEApEtmZEkvWdAtb/A155AqWt9wjaWeGJ2yKdmvRbS7ZjotRMahk3gLO6lE4TL9+MDM+6hh5MVl6KtoleZPJH/9bCWehUeg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=bQCBen7WE5eytDcZ1nJLoxkaDtNuOcrVO8raTvDRW3IjIeNk4QB6KO7mz3yBUMQBDlrg5eeSKnneUS2SzJjFnih6r9oc58gxubXPxeStixy9iYjUqJk10mzx3w3+aWIQUGG2aTfAle0qZXl0eCYi6EiGET82ssIXth0wvWl/3NI= Received: by 10.142.222.21 with SMTP id u21mr1867393wfg.128.1203046911668; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:41:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.155.13 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:41:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:41:51 +0900 From: "Adrian Chadd" Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com To: "Uwe Doering" In-Reply-To: <47B4E0A6.3010205@geminix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> <20080214154528.N75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4E0A6.3010205@geminix.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 77adab0d0052401d Cc: Brett Bump , Guy Helmer , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 04:07:48 -0000 On 15/02/2008, Uwe Doering wrote: > Have you tried sorting this list alphabetically? Believe it or not, > when I tried to use Apache 1.3.x with PHP 5.2.x with extensions in > arbitrary order I got inexplicable crashes, too. Ah, stuff like "apache-ssl init's the SSL library, then php + ssl init's the SSL library, and stuff gets funny." -- Adrian Chadd - adrian@freebsd.org From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 09:59:45 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EFEB16A417 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gemini@geminix.org) Received: from geminix.org (geminix.org [213.73.82.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDBBA13C461 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gemini@geminix.org) Message-ID: <47B56289.1050703@geminix.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:59:37 +0100 From: Uwe Doering Organization: Private UNIX Site User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080129 SeaMonkey/1.1.8 (Ubuntu-1.1.8+nobinonly-0ubuntu1) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Chadd References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> <20080214154528.N75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4E0A6.3010205@geminix.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from gemini by geminix.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1JPxM2-000K64-7W; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:59:38 +0100 Cc: Brett Bump , Guy Helmer , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:45 -0000 Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 15/02/2008, Uwe Doering wrote: >> Have you tried sorting this list alphabetically? Believe it or not, >> when I tried to use Apache 1.3.x with PHP 5.2.x with extensions in >> arbitrary order I got inexplicable crashes, too. > > Ah, stuff like "apache-ssl init's the SSL library, then php + ssl > init's the SSL library, and stuff gets funny." Right. It has probably to do with some linking and initialization details of the dynamic libraries involved. However, in my case the offending interaction seemed to be just between the PHP extension modules. To fix the problem I didn't have to change the load order of the Apache modules. Since then I have a line in my PHP upgrade notes that reminds me of sorting the extension list as a last step. This is certainly a pragmatic approach, but for lack of time I didn't bother getting acquainted with the PHP internals, and those of the libs involved, to find the root cause. Regards, Uwe -- Uwe Doering | EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers gemini@geminix.org | http://www.escapebox.net From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 10:30:26 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55C2E16A4EE; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:30:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B90E13C4E9; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:30:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B569C0.30006@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:30:24 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> <47B4D27C.9010503@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <47B4D27C.9010503@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Brett Bump , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:30:26 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: >> Brett Bump wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: >>> >>>> We are going to need more information about your system. What do you >>>> mean by "peak activity"? What is running on the system when it >>>> performs >>>> badly (check top -S, ps, gstat, vmstat -w, vmstat -i). What is your >>>> kernel configuration, dmesg and relevant aspects of the system >>>> configuration? >>>> >>>> Kris >>>> >>> >>> I would call 120 processes with a load average of 0.03 and 99.9 idle >>> with 10-20 sendmail processes and 30 apache jobs nothing to write home >>> about. But when that jumps to 250 processes, a load average of 30 with >>> 50% idle (5-10 second waits on single character ssh echo) a bit busy. >>> That usually means my heavy pop3 users are checking in at the same time >>> someone (or 2 or 3) have sent email to the large volume listservs. Proc >>> stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my >>> drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi >>> tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). >>> >>> Kernel is generic with ipfirewall quota and smp (no ipfw rules yet). >> >> OK, then you definitely need to update to 6.3, quota support in older >> releases had performance problems. > > Actually I am not sure it was possible to merge it to 6.x, it is > definitely in 7.0 though. I checked with the developer, and no-one running 6.x and quotas ever replied to multiple requests to test the patch. It can be found here if you want to resolve this performance problem without upgrading to 7.0: http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/quotagiant/quotas-RELENG_6-20070623-1455.patch Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 12:05:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C7916A418 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:05:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from algardo@sura.ru) Received: from mail.sura.ru (mail.sura.ru [80.95.32.19]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E53413C468 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:05:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from algardo@sura.ru) Received: from guamoko (internal.sura.ru [80.95.32.17]) by mail.sura.ru (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F500C7A9 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:49:24 +0300 (MSK) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:49:23 +0300 From: Aleksey Perov To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20080215144923.b66240ba.algardo@sura.ru> In-Reply-To: <47B569C0.30006@FreeBSD.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> <47B4D27C.9010503@FreeBSD.org> <47B569C0.30006@FreeBSD.org> Organization: JSC Volgatelecom Penza X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; i386-portbld-freebsd6.3) X-NCC-RegID: ru.penza Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:05:24 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > I checked with the developer, and no-one running 6.x and quotas ever > replied to multiple requests to test the patch. It can be found here if > you want to resolve this performance problem without upgrading to 7.0: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/quotagiant/quotas-RELENG_6-20070623-1455.patch Well, I'm running RELENG_6 SMP system with this patch since september 2007 (last updated 2008-02-08), and I haven't seen any quota-related problem. Quota-enabled partition is 60 GB UFS2 containing 25,000+ customers' home directories with Maildir-style mailboxes and surviving 100,000+ deliveries (file creations) and approximately the same number of retrievals (file deletions) each day. mail:~# df -i /disk1 Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on /dev/da1s1d 66343254 25904146 35131648 42% 1479119 7117359 17% /disk1 mail:~# mount /dev/da1s1d on /disk1 (ufs, local, noexec, nosuid, with quotas, soft-updates) If I can run some specific (stress?) tests that might provide useful information, let me know. Output of dmesg, vmstat, iostat, top, etc -- just ask. -- Aleksey From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 14:40:23 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE7C16A419; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:40:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [64.7.153.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 070E013C4F6; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:40:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m1FEeMfR034429; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:40:22 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m1FEeGVr084431 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:40:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200802151440.m1FEeGVr084431@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:40:33 -0500 To: Brett Bump , Kris Kennaway From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:40:23 -0000 At 05:27 PM 2/14/2008, Brett Bump wrote: >stat doesn't show as much as gstat and iostat. Gstat alwasy shows my >drive with /var/mail being 97-100% busy and iostat will always show hi >tps rates, but never anything above 8MB/s (4.10 gave me 30MB/s+). If a lot of users are checking mail at once, the disk might be busying seeking around the disk. >Kernel is generic with ipfirewall quota and smp (no ipfw rules yet). I would change to pf instead of ipf as its better supported. Or just use ipfw. >On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Bill Moran wrote: > > > What _is_ the hardware? > >Dell PowerEdge 1750 1U, 146Gig U320s. The Broadcoms seem to be a change >from the earlier 1550s with intel pro/100s (I prefer the intel's). So this is not the same hardware as before that was running releng_4 ? >I was suspicious that maybe we needed more memory but swap has barely even >been touched (232k used...with 1400meg inactive). Stiill, it might help by allowing more caching... Also I would still increase dirhash as you are getting close to the limit. Also, if you have a large master.passwd file (e.g. > 1000), try changing nsswitch.conf as instructed in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=75855 We had to do this on our pop server otherwise just doing an ls in /var/mail would take several minutes. > > what does > > netstat -ni > > give > >-bash-2.05b$ netstat -ni >Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts >Oerrs Coll >bge0 1500 00:0f:1f:66:0e:e6 12511748 902 >12025487 0 0 >bge0 1500 208.107.160/2 208.107.161.82 17011211 - >16533277 - - >bge1 1500 > 00:0f:1f:66:0e:e8 3523091 586 4089056 0 0 >bge1 1500 >10.1.1/24 10.1.1.1 3516790 - 4087415 - - >lo0 16384 > 4659734 0 4659733 0 0 >lo0 16384 >fe80:3::1/64 fe80:3::1 0 - 0 - - >lo0 16384 >::1/128 ::1 2772 - 2772 - - >lo0 16384 >127 127.0.0.1 147255 - 147255 - - > > > and what options do you have on ifconfig ? Are the errors seen on > > your switch port as well or just in netstat -ni ? > >ifconfig_bge0="inet 208.107.161.82 netmask 255.255.254.0 media >100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" >ifconfig_bge1="inet 10.1.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 media >100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" > >No, the switch shows clear, they only show up as input errors on this box. >The box sitting under this one has an uptime of 621 days with 1 Oerr. I seem to recall people having issues with the media selection using bge based nics. e.g. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=112570 I would try using autoneg instead. There are other options that might not be getting set right (e.g. FC). autoneg might take care of it for you, but as I said before there have been a number of bug fixes to the driver since 6.2. Similarly, the ports you are using have known security issues from 6.2 so you are better off to start from 6.3 and its port as you will have less patching to do. ---Mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 15:47:17 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C75CA16A46C for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:47:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D15313C455 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:47:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1FFlF2G079232; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:47:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1FFlFqI079229; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:47:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:47:15 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: Uwe Doering In-Reply-To: <47B4E0A6.3010205@geminix.org> Message-ID: <20080215083930.P79197@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4C19F.6000900@palisadesys.com> <20080214154528.N75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4E0A6.3010205@geminix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Guy Helmer Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:47:17 -0000 On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Uwe Doering wrote: > Have you tried sorting this list alphabetically? Believe it or not, > when I tried to use Apache 1.3.x with PHP 5.2.x with extensions in > arbitrary order I got inexplicable crashes, too. > > Now, of course it was just a coincidence that it worked for me after > sorting the extension list. What this in fact points to is that the > order of extensions can be important in that list, for whatever reason. > For me it worked after sorting the list, but YMMV. Might be worth a > try, though. > > Regards, > > Uwe > -- > Uwe Doering | EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers > gemini@geminix.org | http://www.escapebox.net > Ran it stock, sorted, read a thread a while back about someone who thought you should have mysql first, then imap, then blah blah blah, nothing made any difference. The machine tends to always show about 98% memory used, although at any point in time 1/2 of that could be inact. The malloc errors in the apache logs made me consider the idea of adding more memory to the box (but there are always pundits that say, "wow, more than 2g?"). Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 15:56:18 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0CD16A41B; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:56:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E7CC13C4CE; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:56:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1FFuHNl079282; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:56:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1FFuHCT079279; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:56:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:56:17 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <47B569C0.30006@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20080215084810.R79197@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> <47B4D27C.9010503@FreeBSD.org> <47B569C0.30006@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:56:18 -0000 On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Kris Kennaway wrote: > I checked with the developer, and no-one running 6.x and quotas ever > replied to multiple requests to test the patch. It can be found here if > you want to resolve this performance problem without upgrading to 7.0: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/quotagiant/quotas-RELENG_6-20070623-1455.patch > > Kris > Thanks Kris. The box was a new install and the users had quotas before, although I have not enabled quotas on the box as of yet. I usually install ipfw in case we start getting DOS attacks, and we reject about 60k email a day mostly from the RIPE and APNIC networks. When one of these machines was new and running 4.10 it suddenly disappeared from the network one day. We found we had to disable a DOS attack feature in the BIOS for the nics. After that it ran quite nicely for around 2 years before the next reboot. ;-) Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 16:48:05 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B96A16A419; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:48:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (host-82-161-107-208.midco.net [208.107.161.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F3713C461; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:48:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from mail.rsts.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1FGm3XG079511; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:48:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) Received: from localhost (bbump@localhost) by mail.rsts.org (8.13.6/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id m1FGm3k9079508; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:48:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from bbump@rsts.org) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.rsts.org: bbump owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:48:03 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Bump To: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <200802151440.m1FEeGVr084431@lava.sentex.ca> Message-ID: <20080215085714.K79197@mail.rsts.org> References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <200802151440.m1FEeGVr084431@lava.sentex.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Kris Kennaway , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:48:05 -0000 On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >Dell PowerEdge 1750 1U, 146Gig U320s. The Broadcoms seem to be a change > >from the earlier 1550s with intel pro/100s (I prefer the intel's). > > So this is not the same hardware as before that was running releng_4 ? Yes, it is actually the same physical box. The mail server started life on a PowerEdge 1550 1U with intel nics, but was rapidly running out of storage. We had a backup 1750 for the content management system so put 4.10 on it and then just copied the users (about 8k of them) and their files across. The 4.x line was considered grossly out of date at the time, but was the quickest and easiest way to do an upgrade in under 1 hour without the users calling wondering where the mail server had gone. I still have 18 4.10 machines out in the field running various other tasks, 24/7 365+ a year spamming me daily information as to the health of my networks. But this one has me baffled as the machine seems perfectly sane for 18 hours a day and can then turn into a slug from 10am-4pm (peak user activity). > >I was suspicious that maybe we needed more memory but swap has barely even > >been touched (232k used...with 1400meg inactive). > > Stiill, it might help by allowing more caching... Also I would still > increase dirhash as you are getting close to the limit. Also, if you > have a large master.passwd file (e.g. > 1000), try changing > nsswitch.conf as instructed in > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=75855 > > We had to do this on our pop server otherwise just doing an ls in > /var/mail would take several minutes. I know that one quite well. ;-) I did a massive user cleanup/renumber last summer and blew away about 5k users. I'm now sitting with about 3k and we run 10 different groups as well as the groups added with clamav, mailman, mysql, www etc. The 4.x versions never caused me to wait on a directory listing, however with so many files you can't wildcard search anything. I presumed the change to UFS2 had something to do with this. I'll increase dirhash and have already switched nsswitch.conf to files. > I seem to recall people having issues with the media selection using > bge based nics. e.g. > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=112570 > > I would try using autoneg instead. There are other options that might > not be getting set right (e.g. FC). autoneg might take care of it > for you, but as I said before there have been a number of bug fixes > to the driver since 6.2. Similarly, the ports you are using have > known security issues from 6.2 so you are better off to start from > 6.3 and its port as you will have less patching to do. > > ---Mike > I started with autoneg and changed it because I thought maybe we were having network congestion problems, but I've very sure that is now not the case (so yes, this one can easily be changed back). Possilby the weekend project will be setting up the backup with 6.3 to switch everything over to that. Brett From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 17:44:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A17516A417 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:44:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bmw@wezel.com) Received: from toq4-srv.bellnexxia.net (wynq.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A420813C44B for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:44:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bmw@wezel.com) Received: from toip6.srvr.bell.ca ([209.226.175.125]) by tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20080215171229.BNJP29750.tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net@toip6.srvr.bell.ca> for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:12:29 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CADdXtUdA5co+/2dsb2JhbACBWa0M Received: from bas2-toronto63-1088801342.dsl.bell.ca (HELO mg-i1200.home.wezel.com) ([64.229.202.62]) by toip6.srvr.bell.ca with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2008 12:09:44 -0500 To: Brett Bump Message-ID: <1203095548.47b5c7fc4fd1d@mg-i1200.home.wezel.com> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:12:28 -0500 (EST) From: Bruce Walker References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <200802151440.m1FEeGVr084431@lava.sentex.ca> <20080215085714.K79197@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080215085714.K79197@mail.rsts.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: BorderWare BorderPost (IMP/PHP 2.2.0) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:44:54 -0000 Quoting Brett Bump : > > The mail server started life > on a PowerEdge 1550 1U with intel nics, but was rapidly running out of > storage. We had a backup 1750 for the content management system so put > 4.10 on it and then just copied the users (about 8k of them) and their > files across. Brett, possibly quick test for you: install a different disk controller in the the 1750 -- any controller at all that isn't based on the LSI Logic 1030 or 1020 chipset. Eg: any Adaptec will do. In my experience the LSI 1020 and 1030 chipsets using the mpt driver are complete junk. Very bad performance. This drove me crazy with Sun v20z and v40z servers until we installed a different controller and bypassed the on-board controller. It also made it impossible to use Sun x4100 boxes as there's no way to upgrade from the onboard SCSI controller. I've seen checkins to the mpt driver in the last year so this may finally have been fixed in 6.3 (and 7.0, etc.). Cheers! -bmw From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 17:59:47 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E8B16A46D for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:59:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@sopwith.solgatos.com) Received: from schitzo.solgatos.com (pool-72-90-115-244.ptldor.fios.verizon.net [72.90.115.244]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8036013C4DB for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:59:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@sopwith.solgatos.com) Received: from schitzo.solgatos.com (localhost.home.localnet [127.0.0.1]) by schitzo.solgatos.com (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m1FHxktb023416 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:46 -0800 Received: from sopwith.solgatos.com (uucp@localhost) by schitzo.solgatos.com (8.14.1/8.13.4/Submit) with UUCP id m1FHxkuQ023413 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:46 -0800 Received: from localhost by sopwith.solgatos.com (8.8.8/6.24) id RAA17875; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:57:05 GMT Message-Id: <200802151757.RAA17875@sopwith.solgatos.com> To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:48:03 MST." <20080215085714.K79197@mail.rsts.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:57:04 +0000 From: Dieter Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:59:47 -0000 > > >Dell PowerEdge 1750 1U, 146Gig U320s. The Broadcoms seem to be a change > > >from the earlier 1550s with intel pro/100s (I prefer the intel's). > > > > So this is not the same hardware as before that was running releng_4 ? > > Yes, it is actually the same physical box. > this one has me baffled as the machine seems perfectly sane for 18 hours > a day and can then turn into a slug from 10am-4pm (peak user activity). Is the disk layout the same as before? Any chance that two heavily used partitions are now on the same drive? Or a heavily used partition was on the fast end of the disk and is now on the slow end? Have you ruled out a mutex problem? Differences in memory usage / disk cache / disk algorithms between 4.x and 6.x ? From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 20:36:16 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D311416A41A for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:36:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1E8613C4CE; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:36:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B5F7BF.9050608@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:36:15 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Bump References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <200802151440.m1FEeGVr084431@lava.sentex.ca> <20080215085714.K79197@mail.rsts.org> In-Reply-To: <20080215085714.K79197@mail.rsts.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:36:16 -0000 Brett Bump wrote: > Possilby the weekend project will be setting up the backup with 6.3 to > switch everything over to that. The first thing you need to do is either disable quotas or apply the patch (maybe in conjunction with the 6.3 upgrade). That *is* the cause of at least some of your performance problems. If any issues remain, then we can revisit once you have done that. Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 20:42:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636AB16A419; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:42:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9514213C457; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:42:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47B5F92E.5070103@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:42:22 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Aleksey Perov References: <20080214114759.R75215@mail.rsts.org> <47B49A16.1080103@FreeBSD.org> <20080214131026.Y75492@mail.rsts.org> <47B4D139.5020701@FreeBSD.org> <47B4D27C.9010503@FreeBSD.org> <47B569C0.30006@FreeBSD.org> <20080215144923.b66240ba.algardo@sura.ru> In-Reply-To: <20080215144923.b66240ba.algardo@sura.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, kib@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:42:24 -0000 Aleksey Perov wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> I checked with the developer, and no-one running 6.x and quotas ever >> replied to multiple requests to test the patch. It can be found here if >> you want to resolve this performance problem without upgrading to 7.0: >> >> http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/quotagiant/quotas-RELENG_6-20070623-1455.patch > > Well, I'm running RELENG_6 SMP system with this patch since september > 2007 (last updated 2008-02-08), and I haven't seen any quota-related > problem. Quota-enabled partition is 60 GB UFS2 containing 25,000+ > customers' home directories with Maildir-style mailboxes and surviving > 100,000+ deliveries (file creations) and approximately the same number > of retrievals (file deletions) each day. > > mail:~# df -i /disk1 > Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on > /dev/da1s1d 66343254 25904146 35131648 42% 1479119 7117359 17% /disk1 > mail:~# mount > /dev/da1s1d on /disk1 (ufs, local, noexec, nosuid, with quotas, soft-updates) > > If I can run some specific (stress?) tests that might provide useful > information, let me know. Output of dmesg, vmstat, iostat, top, etc -- > just ask. Thanks, that is precisely the kind of feedback we are looking for. Kris