Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:11:43 -0800 From: Milo Hyson <milo@cyberlifelabs.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Weird context-switching performance [RESOLVED] Message-ID: <1075612303.340.2.camel@beastie.lab.cyberlifelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <1075600839.50745.7.camel@beastie.lab.cyberlifelabs.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0401311535040.38031-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <1075600839.50745.7.camel@beastie.lab.cyberlifelabs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Situation resolved. Turns out there was one small line in a kernel config file that we overlooked. Seems the apm device was causing a massive performance penalty. We don't really need it so we removed it. All performance metrics are now exactly where they should be. -- Milo Hyson Chief "Mad" Scientist CyberLife Labs, LLC On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 18:00, Milo Hyson wrote: > We don't have any other systems that are as similar as the two in the > test, however we did plot context-switching performance against CPU and > memory performance on several systems to see if anything jumped out. We > found that beastie (the 2200+) is doing only about 26% of the > task-switches/dhrystone that the other systems were, which were all > pretty much about equal with each other. This is consistent with the > observation that appserver (the 2100+) is four-times as fast. I think we > can probably conclude that beastie is running slower than it should. > > So the question still remains. What could affect context-switching to > this degree yet not show up in other benchmarks?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1075612303.340.2.camel>