Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 7 May 2006 14:23:12 -0400
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Sven Petai <hadara@bsd.ee>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, performance@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Fine-grained locking for POSIX local sockets (UNIX domain sockets)
Message-ID:  <20060507182312.GA185@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060507190844.K46997@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <20060506150622.C17611@fledge.watson.org> <200605071949.54978.hadara@bsd.ee> <20060507190844.K46997@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 07:16:34PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
>=20
> On Sun, 7 May 2006, Sven Petai wrote:
>=20
> >I performed tests on a 4 * dualcore 2Ghz opteron system (so 8 cores in=
=20
> >total).
> >
> >In general with 10 parallel smacker threads the performance seems to go =
up=20
> >with your patch by ~44% and with 100 parallel threads it goes down ~25%
>=20
> This is an interesting effect I need to explore.  Kris reported much=20
> increased contention on locks within the process (between threads) when=
=20
> running with my patch.  It would be interesting to know what the effect o=
n=20
> average query time is -- perhaps it has gone down and we're looking at=20
> increased scheduler related contention.
>=20
> I noticed the results in the tests seem somewhat variable.  I've noticed=
=20
> that MySQL bennchmarking is heavily affected by test run time and order. =
=20
> It's not atypical when running a series of identical tests to see a first=
=20
> result half the end rate, a second result *better* than the end rate, and=
=20
> then it balance out between the two.  For example, I see the following on=
 a=20

Also, I see a slow but statistically significant deterioration in
performance over time.  Maybe mysql's memory is getting fragmented or
something.

Kris

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEXjsQWry0BWjoQKURAtNGAJ0fM1JzVK9Rbj5c+7bunFj6oVGL/ACdFY+B
gnscH3roaT5uePFlo4ek4vo=
=af63
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060507182312.GA185>