| From: | "Magnus Naeslund(t)" <mag(at)fbab(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, lutzeb(at)aeccom(dot)com, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wierd context-switching issue on Xeon |
| Date: | 2004-04-20 22:47:49 |
| Message-ID: | 4085A895.6080403@fbab.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hmmm ... I've been able to reproduce the CS storm on a dual Athlon,
> which seems to pretty much let the Xeon per se off the hook. Anybody
> got a multiple Opteron to try? Totally non-Intel CPUs?
>
> It would be interesting to see results with non-Linux kernels, too.
>
> regards, tom lane
I also tested on an dual Athlon MP Tyan Thunder motherboard (2xMP2800+,
2.5GB memory), and got the same high numbers.
I then ran with kernel 2.6.5, it lowered them a little, but it's still
some ping pong effect here. I wonder if this is some effect of the
scheduler, maybe the shed frequency alone (100HZ vs 1000HZ).
It would be interesting to see what a locking implementation ala FUTEX
style would give on an 2.6 kernel, as i understood it that would work
cross process with some work.
The first file attached is kernel 2.4 running one process then starting
up the other one.
Same with second file, but with kernel 2.6...
Regards
Magnus
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| vmstat_1-1 | text/plain | 2.2 KB |
| vmstat_1-2 | text/plain | 2.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2004-04-21 00:27:28 | Re: Moving postgres to FC disks |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-04-20 21:58:31 | Re: Use of subquery causes seq scan??? |