public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL pgbench performance regression in 2.6.23+
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 12:10:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080523101000.GA13964@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1211536814.5851.18.camel@marge.simson.net>


* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:

> My take on the numbers is that both kernels preempt too frequently for 
> _this_ load.. but what to do, many many loads desperately need 
> preemption to perform.
> 
>       2.6.22.18     2.6.22.18-batch          2.6.26.git    2.6.26.git.batch
> 1   7487.115236         7643.563512         9999.400036         9915.823582
> 2  17074.869889        15360.150210        14042.644140        14958.375329
> 3  25073.139078        24802.446538        15621.206938        25047.032536
> 4  24236.413612        26126.482482        16436.055117        25007.183313
> 5  26367.198572        28298.293443        19926.550734        27853.081679
> 6  24695.827843        30786.651975        22375.916107        28119.474302
> 8  21020.949689        31973.674156        25825.292413        31070.664011
> 10 22792.204610        31775.164023        26754.471274        31596.415197
> 15 21202.173186        30388.559630        28711.761083        30963.050265
> 20 21204.041830        29317.044783        28512.269685        30127.614550
> 30 18519.965964        27252.739106        26682.613791        28185.244056
> 40 17936.447579        25670.803773        24964.936746        26282.369366
> 50 16247.605712        25089.154310        21078.604858        25356.750461

was 2.6.26.git.batch running the load with SCHED_BATCH, or did you do 
other tweaks as well?

if it's other tweaks as well then could you perhaps try to make 
SCHED_BATCH batch more agressively?

I.e. i think it's a perfectly fine answer to say "if your workload needs 
batch scheduling, run it under SCHED_BATCH".

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2008-05-23 10:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-21 17:34 PostgreSQL pgbench performance regression in 2.6.23+ Greg Smith
2008-05-22  7:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-22  8:28   ` Dhaval Giani
2008-05-22  9:05     ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-22 10:34       ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-22 11:25         ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-22 11:44           ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-22 12:09             ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-22 12:24               ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-22 13:16                 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-23  7:13                 ` Greg Smith
2008-05-23 10:00                   ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-23 10:10                     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-05-23 10:15                       ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-23 23:18                         ` Greg Smith
2008-05-23 23:46                           ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-24  8:08                             ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-27  0:28                             ` Greg Smith
2008-05-27  5:59                               ` [patch] " Mike Galbraith
2008-05-27  8:20                                 ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-27  8:35                                   ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-06  5:03                                 ` Greg Smith
2008-06-06  6:13                                   ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 11:38                                     ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 12:50                                       ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 13:07                                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-07 14:16                                           ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 16:16                                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-07 17:56                                               ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 13:08                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-07 14:54                                         ` [patch part 2] " Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 16:12                                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-07 17:53                                             ` Mike Galbraith
2008-06-07 18:19                                               ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-23 13:05                       ` Mike Galbraith
2008-05-23 13:35                         ` Mike Galbraith
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-05-23 11:26 Anton Petrusevich
2008-05-23 18:46 ` Greg Smith

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=20080523101000.GA13964@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=gsmith@gregsmith.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.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