From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Poor PostgreSQL scaling on Linux 2.6.25-rc5 (vs 2.6.22)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:58:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080311075845.GA13758@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200803111749.29143.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
* Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-11 7:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-11 6:49 Poor PostgreSQL scaling on Linux 2.6.25-rc5 (vs 2.6.22) Nick Piggin
2008-03-11 7:58 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-03-11 8:28 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-11 9:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-11 21:07 ` Nicholas Miell
2008-03-11 21:34 ` Cyrus Massoumi
2008-03-11 23:12 ` Nicholas Miell
2008-03-11 23:42 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-11 23:47 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-03-12 9:00 ` Zhang, Yanmin
[not found] ` <20080311102538.GA30551@elte.hu>
[not found] ` <20080311120230.GA5386@elte.hu>
2008-03-12 1:21 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-12 7:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-17 0:44 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-17 5:16 ` Ray Lee
2008-03-17 5:21 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-03-17 7:19 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-17 8:26 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-03-17 8:54 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-17 9:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-03-17 9:56 ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-17 10:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-17 5:34 ` Nick Piggin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-03-14 15:42 Xose Vazquez Perez
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=20080311075845.GA13758@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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.