LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: "Molnar, Ingo" <mingo@elte.hu>, 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 14:07:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1205269674.12854.16.camel@entropy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200803111749.29143.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>

On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 17:49 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:

> 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.
> 

The FreeBSD folks have a whole host of benchmark results (MySQL,
PostgreSQL, BIND, NSD, ebizzy, SPECjbb, etc.) located at
http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/ that demonstrate that the
2.6.23+ scheduler is worse than the 2.6.22 scheduler and both are worse
than FreeBSD 7.

The interesting thing is that they've been running these tests
constantly for years now to demonstrate that their new scheduler hasn't
regressed compared to their old scheduler and as a benchmark against the
competition (i.e. Linux).

Does anybody even do this at all for Linux?

(Also, ignoring MySQL because it's a terrible piece of software at least
when regarding it's scalability is a bad idea. It's the M in LAMP, it
has a huge user base, and FreeBSD manages to outperform Linux with the
same unscalable piece of software.)

-- 
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>


  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-03-11 21:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-11  6:49 Nick Piggin
2008-03-11  7:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-11  8:28   ` Nick Piggin
2008-03-11  9:59     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-11 21:07 ` Nicholas Miell [this message]
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
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=1205269674.12854.16.camel@entropy \
    --to=nmiell@comcast.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --subject='Re: Poor PostgreSQL scaling on Linux 2.6.25-rc5 (vs 2.6.22)' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).