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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox