Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:52:36 +0100 (BST)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To:        =?ISO-2022-JP?Q?=1B$BVC4d=1B=28Jccuiyyan=40sina=2Ecom?= <ccuiyyan@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: dup() scales badly on multicore platform
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.0904021151320.94891@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <4451ccf20904020319r6b66f390vebbb678b9e8eb2ab@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4451ccf20904020319r6b66f390vebbb678b9e8eb2ab@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--621616949-14832556-1238669556=:94891
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-2022-JP; format=flowed


On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, 崔岩ccuiyyan@sina.com wrote:

>       i benchchmark the dup() system call on 32 cores machine in 
> FreeBSD-current8.0.
>
>       The results are bad. The phenomenon is easy to come out. Each 
> process(not thread) on the core
>
>       dup() its private file, and close() in a tight loop. The time 
> completing the parallel workload
>
>       is considered as performance. At first, i think there are some locks. 
> However, lock profiling
>
>       in FreeBSD is strange and interesting. I attach the graph and lock 
> profiling. Any ideas?

Could you post your benchmark code?  It sounds from the above as though you 
have 32 processes, ecah dup'ing and closing a descriptor originally created in 
that process (and not a shared descriptor with other processes)?

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge
--621616949-14832556-1238669556=:94891--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0904021151320.94891>