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