public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Significant performance difference for postgres w/o sched_autogroup
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 11:28:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150709092827.GW10242@alap3.anarazel.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1436409938.3477.31.camel@gmx.de>

On 2015-07-09 04:45:38 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 17:45 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Workload:
> > 
> > postgresql (multi-process via shared memory SQL server) and benchmark
> > client (pgbench, multi threaded) running on the same server. Connected
> > using unix sockets.  The statements are relatively simple (~1.5ms on
> > average), forcing frequent back/forth between server processes and
> > pgbench threads.
> > 
> > I found that disabling sched_autogroup *significantly* reduces
> > throughput. Even when both server and client are started from the same
> > terminal and thus should be in the same group!
> > 
> > There's a significant difference in how %sys with autogroups
> > enabled/disabled. ~8% v ~27%. That sounds too much.
> 
> Seems reasonable to me.  1(tg)/2(tgs) > 1(task)/N(tasks), throughput is
> what the server can sustain on its given budget, larger budget means
> less client blockage, thus less %sys.

That'd make some sense if there were other stuff going on - but here the
same total budget in both cases leads to a 40% difference in throughput:

autogroup on: tps = 21329.219141; autogroup off: tps = 15006.317841

there's really nothing to do for the kernel or other tasks in the
background. It's a readonly workload, not requiring lots of memory, ...

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-09  9:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-08 15:45 Significant performance difference for postgres w/o sched_autogroup Andres Freund
2015-07-09  2:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-09  9:28   ` Andres Freund [this message]
2015-07-09 10:35     ` Mike Galbraith

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=20150709092827.GW10242@alap3.anarazel.de \
    --to=andres@anarazel.de \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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