From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:32:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1224671528.7511.11.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1224669821.6871.16.camel@marge.simson.net>
On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 12:03 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> It has positive effects too, but IMHO, the bad outweigh the good.
BTW, most dramatic on the other end of the spectrum is pgsql+oltp. With
preemption as is, it collapses as load climbs to heavy with preemption
knobs at stock. Postgres uses user-land spinlocks and _appears_ to wake
others while these are still held. For this load, there is such a thing
as too much short-term fairness, preempting lock holder creates nasty
gaggle of contended lock spinners. It's curable with knobs, and I think
it's postgres's own fault, but may be wrong.
With that patch, pgsql+oltp scales perfectly.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-22 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-17 17:27 [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched: optimize group load balancer Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched: fair scheduler should not resched rt tasks Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched: revert back to per-rq vruntime Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-17 17:27 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched: fix wakeup preemption Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-20 21:57 ` Chris Friesen
2008-10-20 12:05 ` [PATCH 0/4] pending scheduler updates Ingo Molnar
2008-10-21 17:35 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-10-22 9:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 10:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 10:32 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2008-10-22 12:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 12:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 12:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 13:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-10-22 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-10-22 17:56 ` Mike Galbraith
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1224671528.7511.11.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.