From: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, wilsont@us.ibm.com
Subject: specweb99: dcache scalability results
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 12:37:51 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020712123751.B19931@in.ibm.com> (raw)
At OLS, Hanna presented some of our work related to directory entry
cache. I am presenting another set of interesting results
that are a part of this ongoing work.
Mainly, we have been working on two tracks - reduce dcache_lock
acquisitions by holding it while walking a cached path as suggested
by Al Viro (fastwalk) and do a completely lockfree lookup/walk using RCU and
lazy updation of the LRU list (dcache_rcu). Both showed promise and
Troy Wilson from LTC perfromance team did a comparative study of these
two dcache patches using specweb99. His measurement identifies
what is good for dentry cache to use. Here is a summary of his reasults.
The measurements were done on a 8-CPU PIII Xeon server with more RAM than
you and I can dream of getting in your desktop ;-)
More details of the directory entry cache work can be found in
http://lse.sourceforge.net/locking/dcache/dcache.html.
The dcache patches are available from Read-Copy Update
package in http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/lse.
Throughput comparison:
---------------------
kernel throughput % improvement
(simultaneous connections)
----- -------------------------- -------------
2.4.17+lse02E 2258 -
2.4.17+lse02E+fastwalk 2280 1%
2.4.17+lse02E+dcache_rcu 2530 12%
Lockmeter comparison: (with apology for the > 80 col text)
---------------------
2.4.17+lse02E:
SPINLOCKS HOLD WAIT
UTIL CON MEAN( MAX ) MEAN( MAX )(% CPU) TOTAL NOWAIT SPIN RJECT NAME
15.7% 20.8% 2.1us(6668us) 23us( 14ms)( 4.4%) 5215460 79.2% 20.8% 0% dcache_lock
2.4.17+lse02E+fastwalk:
SPINLOCKS HOLD WAIT
UTIL CON MEAN( MAX ) MEAN( MAX )(% CPU) TOTAL NOWAIT SPIN RJECT NAME
17.2% 17.7% 7.0us( 13ms) 53us( 30ms)( 2.9%) 1608566 82.3% 17.7% 0% dcache_lock
2.4.17+lse02E+dcache_rcu:
SPINLOCKS HOLD WAIT
UTIL CON MEAN( MAX ) MEAN( MAX )(% CPU) TOTAL NOWAIT SPIN RJECT NAME
1.9% 2.3% 2.0us(3343us) 71us(9406us)(0.20%) 657152 97.7% 2.3% 0% dcache_lock
Conclusions:
------------
Fastwalk clearly helps by reducing the number of dcache_lock
acquisitions by 69.9%. However, holding the lock over entire walk of
the path is clearly detrimental to performance as seen by the 3-fold
increase in average hold time and average wait time. dcache_rcu has
the biggest positive impact on performance for webserver type of
workload. Its gains come from two improvements - 87.3% reduction in
lock acquisitions at the same time keeping the lock hold time constant.
Acknowledgements:
-----------------
SPEC(tm) and the benchmark name SPECweb(tm) are registered trademarks
of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. The benchmarking
were done for research purpose only and were non-compliant with the
following devaitions from the rules -
1. It was run on hardware that does not meet the SPEC
availability-to-the-public criteria. The machine was an
engineering sample.
2. access_log wasn't kept for full accounting. It was being
written, but deleted every 200 seconds.
For the latest SPECweb99 benchmark results visit http://www.spec.org
Thanks
--
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com> http://lse.sourceforge.net
Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India.
reply other threads:[~2002-07-12 7:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20020712123751.B19931@in.ibm.com \
--to=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=wilsont@us.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox