(sound of lightbulb warming up) Ah, well, then could part of the issue be that delay_sig(1) assumes one tick=10 ms? In these particular boxes, hires_tick is on. Does that affect things?
So even if I reduce core_chunk its gonna run pretty hot in terms of cpu cycles. Could something like this work if I had a dtrace script running? dtrace -w -n 'fbt:genunix:core:enter {curlwpsinfo->pr_pri=0;}' In the long run, of the intent is to give up the cpu for ~10 ms here, wouldn't the right thing to query something internal to determine the right number of ticks to pass here, rather that "1"? Thanks -d > -----Original Message----- > From: Bart Smaalders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 12:29 PM > To: David McDaniel (damcdani) > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Philip Beevers; perf-discuss@opensolaris.org > Subject: Re: [perf-discuss] Means to reduce core-dumping > impact on performance critical system? > > Eric Lowe wrote: > > David McDaniel (damcdani) wrote: > >> I'd try to use dtrace to get more insight but I cant figure out > >> where to start since I cant find the place(s) in the > kernel where the > >> dumping is actually taking place. > > > > core() -> do_core() -> {struct execsw->exec_core()} -> elfcore() -> > > core_write() > > > > core() is called from kernel fault context (trap() -> psig() or > > kern_gpfault() on x86/64, or trap_cleanup() on sun4*) which > explains > > why it's priority 60. > > > > - Eric > > The core dump loop does call delay_sig(1); this should wait > for .01 seconds between each write of 32 * 8K. You may wish > to patch core_chunk in /etc/system (or w/ mdb -kw for real > time experiments) to see if reducing the size of writes will help. > > http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/on/usr/src/uts/common/o > s/core.c#core_chunk > > DTrace is your friend here as well... > > - Bart > > > -- > Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/barts > _______________________________________________ perf-discuss mailing list perf-discuss@opensolaris.org