amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

erver if needed. What else can I try to solve the problem??? With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

lockf state. Apache is not much used here, it is just for kind of content management. It is not exposed to external users. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

7 10:59:34 +0200 From: Andrzej Tobola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Alexey Popov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Exactly the same here but on big ata RAID0 with big trafic (~10GB/24h): amper% df -h /ftp/priv FilesystemSizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted one /dev/ar0a 744G679G4.7G99%

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

lighttpd on other server to run in multiple workers. I'll see if it helps. What else can i try? With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubsc

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

fortunately i've lost pmc profiling results. I'll try to collect it again later. See vmstats in attach (vmstat -z; netstat -m; vmstat -i; vmstat -w 1 | head -11;). Also you can see kgmon profiling results at: http://83.167.98.162/gprof/ With best regards, Alexey Popov ITEM

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

e was no significant difference in CPU usage. I disagree about your words about recent version. I have this effect on many servers with latest FreeBSD-6-stable and em. Actually I have more servers with this effect than without it. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

em01463513610 1869 I tried disabling USB in kernel, this ussie was gone, but the main problem was left. Also I have this issue with interrupt aliasing on many servers without problems. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ fr

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

/gprof/intr-graph/ Also I have similiar statistics on mutex profiling and it shows there's no problem in mutexes. http://83.167.98.162/gprof/mtx-graph/mtxgifnew/ I have no idea what else to check. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

er time and they also didn't show anything interesting. All mutex graphs were smooth while disk load peaks. http://83.167.98.162/gprof/mtx-graph/mtxgifnew/ With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.f

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

030x 0x22ec ONLINE 0 040x 0x22ec ONLINE 0 050x 0x22ec ONLINE I tried to run with disabled Read-ahead, but it didn't help. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-s

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

Hi. Ivan Voras wrote: I have a large pool of web backends (Apache + mod_php5) with 2 x Xeon 3.2GHz processors and 2 x Xeon 5120 dual-core processors. The workload is mostly CPU-bound. I'm using 6-STABLE-amd64 and also tried 7-STABLE. If you haven't tried mod_fcgid, give it a try - it can drama

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

ULE" in the 7.0 kernel rather than "options SCHED_4BSD". I tried 7-BETA with SHED_4BSD and id did not help. Now I'll try SHED_ULE, thanks. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.f

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

5 0:36 24.27% httpd With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

~ 2 times less, but still there's 90% system CPU load (see attach). With best regards, Alexey Popov 1 usersLoad 16.36 12.24 6.14 Nov 19 18:08 Mem:KBREALVIRTUAL VN PAGER SWAP PAGER Tot Share Tot

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

of/kdump.txt.gz Also, did you try configuring and running pecl-APC for PHP?'s I'm using eAccelerator. Again, the same soft works good on less-CPU system and on Linux. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

good. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

system CPU usage will also be higher. Usually on PHP backends slow PHP code eats most of the CPU time. I have %user much bigger than %system in CPU states. But now %system is much bigger than %user and I can conclude that on 8-core server FreeBSD consumes more CPU time than PHP. With best regar

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

d ULE 20 7-STABLE quad 4BSD 17 6-STABLE quad 14 6-STABLE dual 21 Linux CentOS 5 quad >50 With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-s

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

tain logical CPUs in the OS itself (see smp(4) man page) and see if there's a certain relationship between how many CPUs are running and what the sys load is. Thank you. I need some time to try all this. I'll report if find something. With best regards, Alexey Popov _

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

run them. Also I tried to halt CPUs by machdep.hlt_cpus sysctl, but in that case %sys in top was still much greater than %user. With best regards, Alexey Popov last pid: 1100; load averages: 8.55, 5.20, 2.35up 0+00:05:39 18:59:52 48 processes: 22 running, 26 sleep

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

ement changes around 45% +/- 10%) seems too much. Thank you for your research. I think you can get more %sys with 4-core processors. For me 2xquad-core systems are now completely unusable as PHP backends. Anyway I'm happy that I'm not alone with this problem

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

else but CPU. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

;50 rps is still far away from FreeBSD. Linux makes that 2000+ lstat's without problem. There's still stat(), open(), gettimeofday(), close() syscalls for each include file in PHP that i can not switch off. And also it is unclear for me what to do with MySQL which happened to have the s

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

Hi all. Sorry, forgot to attach top & vmstat oputput on 8-core 7-stable with optimized PHP realpath_cache_size. With best regards, Alexey Popov last pid: 91239; load averages: 4.64, 4.72, 7.82 up 0+19:1

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

scripts are started in parallel. On a 2x dual Opteron running amd64 I get: This problem is almost invisible for me on 4-core servers. Could you try your benchmark on server with 8 or more cores??? With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

size there's no visible influence of your patch. However Linux is still 2 times faster for my workload and there should also be another ways for optimization. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

egister_init: MOD_LOAD (hwpmc, 0x804833e0, 0x809338a0) error 78 This is related to http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=amd64%2F111994&cat= and it is impossible to use hwpmc with modern CPUs. Is kgmon profiling usable on FreeBSD 7?

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

progress. Wow! Really disabling Patrol Reads solves the problem. Thank you! I have many amrd's and all of them appear to have Patrol Reads enabled by default. But the problem happenes only on three of them. Is this a hardware problem? With best r

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

t. They are in my p4 branch (kris-contention) but I don't have time right now to extract them. I think it would be very useful because I can't see any other ways to profile FreeBSD on the modern many-cores machines. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

s not also need porting. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Also seeing 2 x quad-core system slower that 2 x dual core

ximum size of this cache. See sysctl -a | grep dirhash and tune up vfs.ufs.dirhash_maxmem if vfs.ufs.dirhash_mem is near to the limit. Also could you please provide `top` and `systat -vm 1` output on dual- and quad-core systems during your tests? With best regards, Alexey

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

Linux. With best regards, Alexey Popov last pid: 58755; load averages: 26.42, 20.88, 14.00 up 25+22:12:42 11:51:11 84 processes: 29 running, 55 sleeping CPU states: % user, % nice, % system

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

Hi Alexey Popov wrote: Now we also have terribly performing PostgreSQL on 8-core server. We noticed the slowdown after moving PostgreSQL from 2xXeon 3.0 Apache+PostgreSQL server to dedicated PostgreSQL server. I collected some stats (see attach) before moving to Linux. Sorry for the broken

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

Hi Alexey Popov wrote: Now we also have terribly performing PostgreSQL on 8-core server. We noticed the slowdown after moving PostgreSQL from 2xXeon 3.0 Apache+PostgreSQL server to dedicated PostgreSQL server. I collected some stats (see attach) before moving to Linux. FYI there's top o

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

n work to do because FreeBSD with patched lockmgr on my workload is still 1.5 times slower that Linux. With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD

27;s the patch: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2007-November/038449.html Here's Kris saying that it helps: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2007-November/038672.html I'm not sure it will help to MySQL and Prostgres, but symptoms are mostly identical. W

Re: i915drm

h returned 12 > pci0: at device 2.1 (no driver attached) i915 DRM is not fully supported in -stable. You may try 7-current or this hack: ftp://213.85.11.250/pub/drm3.patch . With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing l

Re: i915drm

er.ru/bsdmail/freebsd-x11_2005/msg00907.html Works for me with graphics/dri-devel and x11-server/xorg-server With best regards, Alexey Popov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscr

Re: i915drm

the latest dri produces the error above resulting slover than before the patch. Is there any diagnostics on how plain xorg doesn't work? Personally I just made patch for successfully initializing i915.ko. I think, freebsd-x11 is better list for this thread. May be Eric can say something?