public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Till Immanuel Patzschke <tip@inw.de>
Cc: lse-tech <lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 15000+ processes -- poor performance ?!
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:11:44 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021219011144.GH31800@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E0116D6.35CA202A@inw.de>

On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 04:46:15PM -0800, Till Immanuel Patzschke wrote:
> as part of my project I need to run a very high number of
> processes/threads on a linux machine.  Right now I have a Dual-PIII
> 1.4G w/ 8GB RAM -- I am running 4000 processes w/ 2-3 threads each
> totaling in a process count of 15000+ processes (since Linux doesn't
> really distinguish between threads and processes...).

You're for the most part SOL unless you can either hack the support or
can wait for it to be finished. More details below.


On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 04:46:15PM -0800, Till Immanuel Patzschke wrote:
> Once I pass the 10000 (+/-) pocesses load increases drastically (on
> startup, although it returns to normal), however the system time (on
> one processor) reaches for 54% (12061 procs) while the only non
> sleeping process is top -- the system is basically doing nothing
> (except scheduling the "nothing" which
> consumes significant system time).
> Is there anything I can do to reduce that system load/time?  (I
> haven't been able to exactly define the "line" but it definitly gets
> worse the more processes need to be handled.)
> Does any of the patchsets address this particular problem?
> BTW: The processes are all alike...
> Thanks for you help!

Try 2.5.52-mm1 + 2.5.52-wli-1. The -wli bits are orthogonal but they do
a small bit to reduce the cpu inefficiencies of many task loads.
-wli is actually maintenance and follow-through on various early 2.5
promises.

proc_pid_readdir() is the cpu culprit, which I have not yet addressed.
You are also going to have severe memory management problems due to the
number of L2 and L3 pagetables created as well as kernel stacks.
2.5.52-mm1 will have 2 of 3 possible things that can be done about L3
pagetables. L2 pagetables limit you to 64K processes with more practical
limits around 16K. As 16K is feasible here, you are running the wrong
kernel version(s).


Bill

  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-12-19  1:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-12-19  0:46 15000+ processes -- poor performance ?! Till Immanuel Patzschke
2002-12-19  0:47 ` [Lse-tech] " Martin J. Bligh
2002-12-19  0:53 ` Till Immanuel Patzschke
2002-12-19  1:15   ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19  1:12     ` David Lang
2002-12-19  1:25       ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19  1:20         ` David Lang
2002-12-19  1:36           ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19  1:42           ` Robert Love
2002-12-19  1:44             ` David Lang
2002-12-19  2:05               ` [Lse-tech] " William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 15:05                 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-12-19 10:27                   ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 10:37                     ` Alex Tomas
2002-12-19 10:55                       ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 15:24                       ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-12-19 15:15                     ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-12-19  1:24     ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19  0:59 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-12-19  1:11 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2002-12-19 14:59 ` Denis Vlasenko
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-19  1:04 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2002-12-19  1:13 ` Robert Love
2002-12-19  2:31 ` Alan Cox
2002-12-19  1:58   ` Rik van Riel
2002-12-19  2:01   ` William Lee Irwin III

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=20021219011144.GH31800@holomorphy.com \
    --to=wli@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=tip@inw.de \
    /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