[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:39:41 -0700
From: "Ma, Chinang" <chinang.ma@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"Wilcox, Matthew R" <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>,
"Tripathi, Sharad C" <sharad.c.tripathi@...el.com>,
"Chilukuri, Harita" <harita.chilukuri@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: 2.6.27-rc5 OLTP performance regression
Peter,
We increased sched_shares_ratelimit and were able to recover the 2% performance regression.
Thanks,
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@...radead.org]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 11:04 AM
To: Ma, Chinang
Cc: Ingo Molnar; Srivatsa Vaddagiri; Mike Galbraith; Gregory Haskins; Steven Rostedt; Nick Piggin; Siddha, Suresh B; Wilcox, Matthew R; Tripathi, Sharad C; Chilukuri, Harita; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.27-rc5 OLTP performance regression
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 20:00 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 10:58 -0700, Ma, Chinang wrote:
> > We found the group scheduler in 2.6.27-rc5 has negative performance
> > impact on TPC Online Transaction Processing workload. The test was
> > conducted on a dual-socket quad-core Xeon server. OLTP workload is
> > disk i/o intensive and we have over 200 database shadow processes
> > running in the server during this test. Enabling group scheduler
> > (CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED=y) reduced performance by 2.0%. Oprofile data
> > indicates significant amount of cycles are spent in tg_shares_up().
> > This is new regression as we did not find the same issue with 2.6.26
> > kernel group scheduler. Is anybody looking into group scheduler
> > performance and any idea for reducing the performance impact?
>
> Because the .26 group scheduler wasn't SMP aware. The extra cost comes
> from the fact that .27 is.
What you can do it increase the /proc/sys/kernel/sched_shares_ratelimit
value and thereby decrease the accuracy of the SMP fairness of the group
scheduler.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists