Hallo Chris,
is there a reason, that you have chosen 5140 byte buffer instead
of 5120 like Solaris has chosen?
I recommend that you chose 5120 as well.
Best regards,
Michael
Chris Pickett wrote:
We've tried to increase the pipe buffer (not bufmod) on FreeBSD this
week. Besides some tricky implementation details the performance gains
in a pure 'copy data' benchmark are *astonishing*. Copy time for a
5140 buffer (from 512) goes down from 4 mins to 2 mins and for a 20480
buffer it goes down to 74 seconds (not a linear win but still
something to consider).
We'll post patches for FreeBSD next month.
Chris
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 8:56 PM, rickey c weisner <rohan...@comcast.net> wrote:
You can push a bufmod on the fifo and use messages up to the maximum
streams message size.
rick
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:48:29AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=CJn96HSh7NQA:10
a=lzmFrgBnj+XnLHvemvnKkQ==:17 a=RLQEIbXJAAAA:8 a=tx7JrHvRAAAA:8
a=ep_KMAzDAAAA:8 a=b2JNCujJsANkwUJLj04A:9 a=uVteT0YrbvIAIDKuawkA:7
a=7_-5LuXN-4LWqWdEruy4W3aRDXUA:4 a=TC1Ce7_l9HwA:10
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on
oss-mail1.opensolaris.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00
autolearn=unavailable version=3.2.5
X-Original-To: perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
Delivered-To: perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:48:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: Bob Friesenhahn <bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us>
X-X-Sender: bfrie...@freddy.simplesystems.org
To: Roland Mainz <roland.ma...@nrubsig.org>
In-Reply-To: <4a56aaee.f6438...@nrubsig.org>
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2
(blade.simplesystems.org [65.66.246.90]);
Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:48:30 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: OpenSolaris Performance/HPC discussions <perf-discuss@opensolaris.org>,
OpenSolaris Shell discussions <shell-disc...@opensolaris.org>,
Garrett D'Amore <gdam...@sun.com>
Subject: Re: [perf-discuss] Changing the default buffer sizes for pipes ?
X-BeenThere: perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Performance General Discussion <perf-discuss.opensolaris.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/options/perf-discuss>,
<mailto:perf-discuss-requ...@opensolaris.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/perf-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:perf-discuss@opensolaris.org>
List-Help: <mailto:perf-discuss-requ...@opensolaris.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/perf-discuss>,
<mailto:perf-discuss-requ...@opensolaris.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: perf-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009, Roland Mainz wrote:
Some applications may misbehave or lock-up if the size of the pipe
buffer is changed.
Erm... why ?
You have already noticed that the size is hard-coded in Solaris
applications (by PIPE_BUF) since the dawn of time. Pipes offer
properties such as atomic reads and writes. PIPE_BUF declares the
maximum size of an atomic write. Some applications depend on this FIFO
behavior for message passing.
You should feel happy that Solaris is using 5120 rather than 512 like
FreeBSD.
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
_______________________________________________
perf-discuss mailing list
perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
--
Rickey C. Weisner
Software Development and Performance Specialist
Principal Field Technologist
Systems Quality Office
cell phone: 615-308-1147
email: rick.weis...@sun.com
_______________________________________________
perf-discuss mailing list
perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
--
Michael Schulte mschu...@sunspezialist.de
OpenSolaris Kernel Development http://opensolaris.org/
_______________________________________________
perf-discuss mailing list
perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
