public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@unthought.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: NFS client (10x) performance regression 2.6.14.7 -> 2.6.15
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 11:48:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060331094850.GF9811@unthought.net> (raw)


Hi guys,

I just found out... Installed 2.6.16.1 (32-bit) on a spanking new dual
opteron 275 (dual-core) machine, and saw that my link jobs were taking
ages.

I narrowed it down a bit - these are the kernels I have tested:
2.6.13.5:  Good
2.6.14.7:  Good
2.6.15:    Poor
2.6.15.7:  Poor
2.6.16.1:  Poor

Sequential NFS I/O is good on all kernels. Only "ld" shows the problem.

On 2.6.14.7, I can run a large link job creating a 60 MB executable in
15.6 seconds wall-clock time.

On 2.6.15, the same link job takes 2 minutes 28 seconds.

This is almost 10 *times* longer.

Testing with tiobench, I can see no notable difference between the
kernels (!)   It seems that this is very specific to ld.  I am using GNU
ld version 2.15.

The NFS client mounts the working directory using NFS v3 over UDP with
default (32k) rsize/wsize.

Since this machine is not in production yet, I can experiment with
kernel patches on it - I would like to try and narrow this down even
further - any suggestions as to which patches to exclude/include will be
greatly appreciated.

Note; I did double-check all the common problems (ethernet problems,
mount options, ...).

-- 

 / jakob


             reply	other threads:[~2006-03-31  9:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-31  9:48 Jakob Oestergaard [this message]
2006-03-31 11:22 ` NFS client regression, simple test program Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 12:22 ` NFS client (10x) performance regression 2.6.14.7 -> 2.6.15 Trond Myklebust
2006-03-31 12:45   ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 13:06     ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-31 13:21       ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 13:44         ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-31 14:08           ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 14:21             ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-31 14:35               ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 14:49                 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2006-03-31 14:57                   ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 15:04                     ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2006-03-31 15:24                       ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 16:35                         ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2006-03-31 18:52                           ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-03-31 15:55                 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-31 16:04                   ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-04-03 15:26                     ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-04-03 15:41                       ` Trond Myklebust
2006-04-03 15:45                         ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-04-04  9:22                           ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-04-24 22:03                             ` Trond Myklebust
2006-04-25  8:08                               ` Jakob Oestergaard

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=20060331094850.GF9811@unthought.net \
    --to=jakob@unthought.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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