Re: [perf-discuss] Re: NFS Performance and Tar

2006-10-02 Thread johansen-osdev
You might consider cross-posting this question to zfs-discuss. I've been lead to believe that there are some known issues with ZFS/NFS performance. However, I don't know to what degree they would affect your configuration. I apologize for the relatively un-helpful response. -j On Sun, Oct 01,

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: NFS Performance and Tar

2006-10-02 Thread johansen-osdev
Disabling the ZIL will cause synchronous writes to occur asynchronously. If any applications depend upon the use of synchronous writes for their correctness, they're likely to be adversely affected. There are a number of ZIL performance fixes that have been checked in recently, or that are in the

Re: [perf-discuss] Prstat CPU display

2006-10-18 Thread johansen-osdev
Mike, > On a related note, I have yet to see vmstat's "b" (kernel threads > blocked on I/O) column be non-zero. This includes a large RAC > environment where the previous measure of I/O health was (don't shoot > the messenger!) iowait. The same workload on S9 consistently showed > non-zero valu

Re: [perf-discuss] Prstat CPU display

2006-10-18 Thread johansen-osdev
Adrian, biowait() still updates cpu_stats.sys.iowait. This means that Solaris is still keeping track of the number of threads that are blocked waiting for I/O. I see no reason not to expose this value to the user. I certainly do not intend to re-introduce a CPU percentage of time waiting for I/O,

Re: [perf-discuss] Prstat CPU display

2006-10-18 Thread johansen-osdev
Adrian, Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I'm not going to make any change that accounts for the amount of time a thread spends waiting for I/O. Rather, I want to re-expose a statistic which, on a per-CPU basis, lists the number of threads blocked in biowait(). -j On Wed, Oct 18

Re: [perf-discuss] Prstat CPU display

2006-10-18 Thread johansen-osdev
Adrian, I agree that these metrics would be useful and nice to have; however, their implementation is outside of the scope of what I intend to address with this fix. I'm simply fixing the functional regression in the kstats. I can't, in good faith, make improvements to microstate accounting and

Re: [perf-discuss] Prstat CPU display

2006-10-18 Thread johansen-osdev
Mike, > As "meaningless" as iowait is/was, there was significant value once we > got beyond "the cpu is busy in iowait... add more boards!" Getting to > that point paid a couple of semesters of tuition for my salesman's > daughters. Iowait is an overloaded term in the Solaris kernel, so the conf

Re: [perf-discuss] Prstat CPU display

2006-10-18 Thread johansen-osdev
Adrian, I agree. This is a good opportunity to discuss performance measurement issues. However, you asked if I would fix your particular issues while fixing the bug that Mike found. I don't want to mislead anybody, so my response was simply that I don't presently have the time to address these a

Re: [perf-discuss] LibMicro on SUN T2000

2006-10-31 Thread johansen-osdev
There isn't any one answer to this question. Do you intend to use this T2000 specific compilation option when you compile the applications that you actually intend to run on this platform? What does the option do? Usually it is desireable to use architecture specific optimizations in benchmarks

Re: [perf-discuss] High dtlb-miss in kernel

2006-11-01 Thread johansen-osdev
> Yes I think this is something I'm looking for, but I'm not sure if I can > use your Cap-Eye kernel image because my code changes are in kernel > modules such as ip, sockfs and genunix. Nevertheless, I'll be happy to > try it. Cap-eye Install can handle changes to kernel modules. However, when y

Re: [perf-discuss] Read lock contention, solaris 9, 32 cores host.

2006-12-13 Thread johansen-osdev
Konstantin: Roch Bourbonnais has a blog entry about some of the less obvious performance aspects of rwlocks: http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/beware_of_the_performance_of It may have information that is useful to your particular situation. > most of the time rw lock is read locked by several thre

Re: [perf-discuss] Read lock contention, solaris 9, 32 cores host.

2006-12-14 Thread johansen-osdev
Konstantin: > write locks can be disregarded here. its only read locks which cannot > be executed in parallel. nobody blames os and/or hardware. > Im trying to understand is it expected behavior or not. I'm not sure I understand why you're saying that it's okay to disregard write locks. Are you

Re: [perf-discuss] Read lock contention, solaris 9, 32 cores host.

2006-12-14 Thread johansen-osdev
Konstantin: > This is single static RW lock which protects array of pointers to > data structures. this array slowly growing to size depended > of specific installation. growing with pretty big size increase at once. > say, on W this RW is locked once in a hour. a lot of threads, > which consume s

Re: [perf-discuss] kstat / intrstat

2007-01-04 Thread johansen-osdev
These numbers for level-XX are a count of CPU cycles spent in each interrupt level. -j On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 12:05:19PM -0800, Sean Liu wrote: > This question is for Solaris 9 - I understand only Solaris 10 has intrstat, > but there is also intrstat provider for kstat in solaris 9: > #kstat -n

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: kstat / intrstat

2007-01-05 Thread johansen-osdev
> What exactly does "count of CPU cycles" mean here? CPU time? in nano > seconds? number of interrupts? Wikipedia has a relatively concise explanation of CPU clock rate here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_clock In intrstat's case, the CPU cycles are read from an on-chip register that advances

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: Re: kstat / intrstat

2007-01-05 Thread johansen-osdev
> So let's say my CPUs are 1200MHz, does it make each increment > 1/1,200,000 second? 1 MHz is 1,000,000 Hz. So if your CPU is 1200 MHz, that's 1,200,000,000 Hz. With this in mind, the increment would actually be 1/1,200,000,000 of a second. > And if I have 600,000 interrupt 6 increments in one

Re: [perf-discuss] prstat-m - cpu% does not add to 100% ?

2007-02-10 Thread johansen-osdev
What version of Solaris are you running? Any additional details you could provide about your configuration and software would be helpful. -j On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 01:05:39PM -0800, Eugene Margulis wrote: > I understand that prstat -m shows microstate wallclock utilization that > should add up

Re: [perf-discuss] prstat-m - cpu% does not add to 100% ?

2007-02-10 Thread johansen-osdev
Eugene: I think I understand why your microstate values aren't adding up to 100%. The fact that you're running Solaris 9 has a lot to do with the problem. Microstate accounting only updates its timestamps when a lwp transitions from one state to another. So, in your case, your lwp has been idle

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: prstat-m - cpu% does not add to 100% ?

2007-02-11 Thread johansen-osdev
> This makes sense, however, I am still a bit confused. You are stating > that in Solaris 9 microstate accounting gets only updated when the lwp > is transitions from one state to another. No, microstate data only gets updated when the lwp transitions from one state to another. This hasn't change

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: Re: prstat-m - cpu% does not add to 100% ?

2007-02-12 Thread johansen-osdev
> OK, I think I got it, please correct if I am wrong: > > Suppose I do [b]prstat -m 10[/b], suppose a given lwp is in state X at > the beginning and transitions to state Y 4 seconds after the beginning > of the monitoring sample and back to X 1 sec later. So, in this scenario the time that your

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: Re: prstat-m - cpu% does not add to 100% ?

2007-02-12 Thread johansen-osdev
> Perfect - this answers my question! No, I don't want to imply that the > mechanism is broken - as long as I understand how to read the data and > how to interpret the discrepancies. With this problem, the data is difficult to interpret on Solaris 9 machines. If you were to request a bug to be f

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: Re: prstat-m - cpu% does not add to 100% ?

2007-02-13 Thread johansen-osdev
> Thanks! As long as I can trust (more or less) the numbers for the > USR/SYS and avoid the dampening effect of the regular prstat - I am > happy. I'm not sure I understand your comments about regular prstat. Would you be kind enough to describe the dampening effect you've mentioned? I'd be inte

Re: [perf-discuss] Project endorsement request: Enhance Solaris for Intel Project

2007-03-22 Thread johansen-osdev
I second Bart's endorsement, if it matters. -j On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:59:14PM -0700, Bart Smaalders wrote: > Eric Saxe wrote: > >I'd like to request endorsement from the performance community for the > >"Enable/enhance Solaris support for Intel Project". > >http://www.opensolaris.org/os/proj

Re: [perf-discuss] Request for guidance on shmat() call attaching at different addre ss

2007-04-04 Thread johansen-osdev
Ganesh: > Next when the client processes comes up, they attach to all these shms > created by server process. When the client process calls "shmat" on > the first 3 memory segments, shmat returns the same address which it > returned to server process (these addresses are stored in 1st shm). > But

Re: [perf-discuss] Impressed with express edition but..

2007-04-20 Thread johansen-osdev
You might consider posting this question to install-discuss. Other people have also complained about the RAM requirement. I don't beleive the installer group monitors the performance list. -j On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 06:25:16AM -0700, Joseph villa wrote: > I just got my cd for the express editio

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: A good indicator of I/O problem

2007-05-21 Thread johansen-osdev
> Be careful with %w... it's not that accurate. If you upgrade your > e20k to Solaris 10, you'll lose that as iowait is no longer > calculated (although the %w column is still there for output > compatibility reasons. %b (% busy) is what you should be looking at > instead. That's not entir

Re: [perf-discuss] Weird load spikes

2007-05-21 Thread johansen-osdev
Another place to start might be with Brendan Gregg's DTrace tools: http://www.brendangregg.com/dtrace.html His prustat, hotuser, hotkernel, and shortlived.d scripts might be helpful in your situation. -j On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 01:50:27PM -0700, Eric Saxe wrote: > Jeffrey Collyer wrote:

Re: [perf-discuss] RFE: "bt" (=batch) scheduler class...

2007-05-30 Thread johansen-osdev
I'm not sure that I understand why we need to introduce new code for this kind of functionality. Why not use the FX class and assign your batch processes priority 0 and a longer time quantum? priocntl(1) explains the details about how one might accomplish this. -j On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:57:

Re: [perf-discuss] RFE: "bt" (=batch) scheduler class...

2007-06-04 Thread johansen-osdev
> My idea was to provide a simple, "preconfigured" tool to do this. Without writing any new code, it seems that we already have a tool for doing this. The manpage for priocntl(1) is pretty explicit: In addition to the system-wide limits on user priority (displayed with priocnt

Re: [perf-discuss] Project sponsorship request: Tesla

2007-06-05 Thread johansen-osdev
Eric, You're one of the leaders of the performance community, so don't forget to vote for yourself. I think this would be great for the performance community. I'm in favor of this project. (+1) -j On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 01:28:50PM -0700, Eric Saxe wrote: > > I'd like the ask the OpenSolaris p

Re: [perf-discuss] Memory leaks detection

2007-07-06 Thread johansen-osdev
Hi Alex: These leaks in tar aren't enough to consume 1GB of memory. When applications leak memory, that memory will be returned to the system once the application exits. What are you using to measure the amount of memory consumed by your system? Can you explain why you think it is leaking memor

Re: [perf-discuss] Poor swap performance

2007-08-21 Thread johansen-osdev
Peter: Would you describe your swap configuration? The output from df -hlk and swap -l would be helpful. Thanks, -j On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:17:05AM -0700, Peter C. Norton wrote: > We use solaris 10 at my company, but I noticed this behavior is the > same/worse on sxde, and I wanted to know i

Re: [perf-discuss] Poor swap performance

2007-08-22 Thread johansen-osdev
> While investigating this, we came up with a test scenario that > consistantly reproduced this behavior. The behavior is that if you > have a system with 4gb of memory, and create a 1gb file in /tmp, and a > 1gb file in /var/tmp, and then you start 2 processes each with an rss > of about 1gb, your