[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080522082814.GA4499@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:58:14 +0530
From: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@...gsmith.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL pgbench performance regression in 2.6.23+
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 09:10:07AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 13:34 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> > PostgreSQL ships with a simple database benchmarking tool named pgbench,
> > in what's labeled the contrib section (in many distributions it's a
> > separate package from the main server/client ones). I see there's been
> > some work done already improving how the PostgreSQL server works under the
> > new scheduler (the "Poor PostgreSQL scaling on Linux 2.6.25-rc5" thread).
> > I wanted to provide you a different test case using pgbench that has taken
> > a sharp dive starting with 2.6.23, and the server improvement changes in
> > 2.6.25 actually made this problem worse.
> >
> > I think it will be easy for someone else to replicate my results and I'll
> > go over the exact procedure below.
>
> Yup, I can reproduce. Running the test with 2.6.25.4, everything is
> waking/running on one CPU, leaving my box 75% idle. Not good.
>
Can you try with 2.6.26-rc? There is minimal load balancing for group
scheduling till 25, which might explain the lack of scalability.
--
regards,
Dhaval
--
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