[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080311075845.GA13758@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:58:45 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Poor PostgreSQL scaling on Linux 2.6.25-rc5 (vs 2.6.22)
* Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> wrote:
> PostgreSQL is different. It has zero idle time when running this
> workload. It actually scaled "super linearly" on my system here, from
> single threaded performance to 8 cores (giving an 8.2x performance
> increase)!
>
> So PostgreSQL performance profile is actually much more interesting.
> To my dismay, I found that Linux 2.6.25-rc5 performs really badly
> after saturating the runqueues and subsequently increasing threads.
> 2.6.22 drops a little bit, but basically settles near the peak
> performance. With 2.6.25-rc5, throughput seems to be falling off
> linearly with the number of threads.
thanks Nick, i'll check this - and i agree that this very much looks
like a scheduler regression. Just a quick suggestion, does a simple
runtime tune like this fix the workload:
for N in /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/*/*/flags; do
echo $[`cat $N`|16] > N
done
this sets SD_WAKE_IDLE for all the nodes in the scheduler domains tree.
(doing this results in over-agressive idle balancing - but if this fixes
your testcase it shows that we were balancing under-agressively for this
workload.) Thanks,
Ingo
--
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