On 10/26/10 19:45, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 02:03:34PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> ...
>> Since you now have the two kernels readily available, can you rule out
>> NFS by just repeating the step which involves it in both kernels and
>> compare th
On 10/27/10 12:55, David Wolfskill wrote:
> That *is* a problem, as I cannot justify a migration to a branch
> of FreeBSD that imposes about a 23% penalty in elapsed time on this
> workload. I want folks at work to have more reason to want to use
> (newer branches of) FreeBSD, not less.
That is
On 10/27/10 13:19, David Wolfskill wrote:
>> note 2x drop in performance between outer and inner tracks.
>
> OK, but I'm not sure how that's likely to work for a multi-spindle RAID
> 0 group
Unless the RAID controller is trying to be overly smart (i.e. plays with
fire) by somehow alternating
This is not a request for help but a report, in case it helps developers
or someone in the future. The setup is:
AMD64 machine, 24 GB RAM, 2x6-core Xeon CPU + HTT (24 logical CPUs)
FreeBSD 8.1-stable, AMD64
PostgreSQL 9.0.1, 10 GB shared buffers, using pgbench with a scale
factor of 500 (7.5 GB
On 11/22/10 17:37, David Xu wrote:
Mark Felder wrote:
I recommend posting this on the Postgres performance list, too.
Regards,
Mark
I think if PostgreSQL uses semaphore for inter-process locking,
it might be a good idea to use POSIX semaphore exits in our head
branch, the new POSIX semap
On 11/23/10 01:26, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 11/22/10 17:37, David Xu wrote:
Mark Felder wrote:
I recommend posting this on the Postgres performance list, too.
Regards,
Mark
I think if PostgreSQL uses semaphore for inter-process locking,
it might be a good idea to use POSIX semaphore exits
On 23 November 2010 10:35, David Xu wrote:
> Ivan Voras wrote:
>> and the overall behaviour is similar - the processes spend a lot of time
>> in "sbwait" and "ksem" states.
>>
> Strange, the POSIX semaphore in head branch does not use ksem, it is
On 11/25/10 10:20, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
If you
still need greater write performance on tiny transactions, consider
getting a battery backup unit (BBU) for your RAID adapter. Quite
remarkably, HP refer to them as "Write-back Cache Enablers" because
installing one is the only way to get an HP RAID a
On 12/06/10 17:31, O. Hartmann wrote:
I know, the essential backend of this chain will be the AMD graphics
card driver with its CAL compiler generating the binary code.
This is probably the biggest obstacle - AMD/ATI support for FreeBSD is
terrible. Specifically in this case, there is no vend
On 31/12/2010 10:06, Nicolas Haller wrote:
Someone knows if there is a page which explains FreeBSD mechanisms about
memory and fs cache management? I think I must read something on it :-)
I don't think there's a single up to date document describing all of it,
but it's conceptually simple and
On 07/01/2011 16:23, Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Hi,
Having in mind that a SAS enterprise disk normally can handle 150-180IOPS, this
benchmark is testing something else ;)
It depends - since ZFS is logging all the time it doesn't have to seek
as much; if all transactions are WRITE and given sequen
On 10/01/2011 14:07, Bruce Cran wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:49:08 +0100
Ivan Voras wrote:
It depends - since ZFS is logging all the time it doesn't have to
seek as much; if all transactions are WRITE and given sequentially,
they will be written to the drive sequentially, even with
On 04/04/2011 06:30, binto wrote:
I got error message& my server suddenly drop :
g_vfs_done() error = 6
g_vfs_done(): ad10s2a[READ(offset=1348599808, length=16384)]error = 6 anyone
can help me please??
This is the wrong list for this question. Better ask on stable@ or
file-systems@
For
On 01/06/2011 13:11, Andriy Gapon wrote:
Anyone knows of a benchmark/test that can measure/demonstrate difference in tlb
shootdown performance (or its lack)?
The "tlb" utility from lmbench may help you.
___
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing l
On the second reading, if you are asking how fast a shootdown operation itself
is, then yes, it will probably not help you :)
--
Sent from my Android phone, please excuse my brevity.
Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 02/06/2011 15:02 Ivan Voras said the following: > On 01/06/2011 13:11,
Andriy Ga
On 2 June 2011 16:24, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 02/06/2011 15:02 Ivan Voras said the following:
>> On 01/06/2011 13:11, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone knows of a benchmark/test that can measure/demonstrate difference in
>>> tlb
>>> shootdown perfo
On 21/10/2011 08:30, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> As I'm not a developer, but for scientific purposes highly interested in
> using GPUs, the only way of doing HPC computing at the moment is with
> nVidias TESLA/nVidia consumer graphics cards and LINUX, since on Linux
> one willing to use the GPU has the n
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Marcin Markowskiwrote:
(on 9.0 we can see also kernel thread named {ix0 que} using 100% CPU),
hw.ixgbe.num_queues=16
If there really are 16 hardware queues, shouldn't there be 16 kernel
threads for queue processing?
__
On 24/01/2012 17:53, Marcin Markowski wrote:
On 24.01.2012 14:22, Ivan Voras wrote:
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Marcin
Markowskiwrote:
(on 9.0 we can see also kernel thread named {ix0 que} using 100% CPU),
hw.ixgbe.num_queues=16
If there really are 16 hardware queues, shouldn&#
On 28/01/2012 23:40, Florian Smeets wrote:
The conclusion right now seems to be that ULE is faster for database
workload,
I've done the same benchmarks with Bullet Cache last year and 4BSD is
*ridiculously* inefficient and slow for this specific workload which
involves a lot of inter-thread
On 20/08/2012 17:22, Alan Cox wrote:
> Try setting kern.maxbcache to two billion and adding 50 billion to the
> setting of vm.kmem_size{,_max}.
Just as a side-note: unless it has some side-effects, it is probably
worth increasing these tunables by default, as RAM is very cheap again.
512 GB in a
On 03/07/2013 18:19, TJ wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> i am looking for some advise to help get the best out of one of my severs.
> It is a Dell PowerEdge R420,32GB,2x8c CPU and igb nics.
> Its primary purpose is to send outgoing mail it can send up to 3 millon
> emails a day and it running exim.
> I am rela
On 07/10/2013 19:28, David Wolfskill wrote:> At work, we have a bunch of
machines that developers use to build some
> software. The machines presently run FreeBSD/amd64 8.3-STABLE @rxx
> (with a few local patches, which have since been committed to stable/8),
> and the software is built within
On 27/06/2014 14:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> Hi,
> I did some measurements and hacks to see about the performance and
> scalability of PostgreSQL 9.3 on FreeBSD, sponsored by The FreeBSD
> Foundation.
>
> The results are described in https://kib.kiev.ua/kib/pgsql_perf.pdf.
> The uncommitted p
On 8 July 2014 13:41, Mark Felder wrote:
>
> On Jul 8, 2014, at 5:58, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> I'm waiting to upgrade some PostgreSQL machines running FreeBSD 9 to
>> FreeBSD 10 - are the patches committed yet / will they be committed for
>> 10.1?
>>
>
>
101 - 125 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
