On 01/29/08 11:40, Attila Nagy wrote:
ps: I have an other problem. I've recently switched from a last year
6-STABLE to 7-STABLE and got pretty bad results on the same machine
with the same bind (9.4).
The graphs are here:
http://picasaweb.google.com/nagy.attila/20080129Fbsd6vs7Bind
The problem still persists and now I can provide some profiling info,
made by HWPMC.
The samples were collected from totally equal machines, the only
difference is the OS (FreeBSD 6-STABLE and FreeBSD 7-STABLE, amd64).
Here is FreeBSD/amd64 6-STABLE (compiled yesterday):
granularity: each sample hit covers 4 byte(s) for 0.00% of 158108.00 seconds
% cumulative self self total
time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name
8.2 12909.00 12909.00 0 100.00% SHA256_Transform [1]
4.7 20408.00 7499.00 0 100.00% kern_select [2]
3.9 26594.00 6186.00 0 100.00% swi_net [3]
3.3 31829.00 5235.00 0 100.00% sopoll [4]
3.3 37059.00 5230.00 0 100.00% syscall [5]
3.3 42280.00 5221.00 0 100.00% bcopy [6]
3.2 47297.00 5017.00 0 100.00% critical_exit [7]
3.1 52274.00 4977.00 0 100.00% Xfast_syscall [8]
2.8 56748.00 4474.00 0 100.00% spinlock_exit [9]
2.8 61176.00 4428.00 0 100.00% DELAY [10]
2.5 65101.00 3925.00 0 100.00% netisr_poll [11]
2.1 68346.00 3245.00 0 100.00% bge_rxeof [12]
1.8 71126.00 2780.00 0 100.00% copyout [13]
1.7 73888.00 2762.00 0 100.00% _mtx_lock_sleep [14]
1.7 76641.00 2753.00 0 100.00% soreceive [15]
1.6 79245.00 2604.00 0 100.00% rn_match [16]
1.6 81769.00 2524.00 0 100.00% selrecord [17]
1.5 84187.00 2418.00 0 100.00% netisr_pollmore [18]
1.5 86526.00 2339.00 0 100.00% copyin [19]
1.5 88843.00 2317.00 0 100.00% uma_zfree_arg [20]
1.4 91011.00 2168.00 0 100.00% uma_zalloc_arg [21]
1.3 93118.00 2107.00 0 100.00% soo_poll [22]
1.1 94793.00 1675.00 0 100.00% bge_poll [23]
1.0 96428.00 1635.00 0 100.00% spinlock_enter [24]
And here is FreeBSD/amd64 7-STABLE (also compiled yesterday):
granularity: each sample hit covers 4 byte(s) for 0.00% of 204813.00 seconds
% cumulative self self total
time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name
9.5 19395.00 19395.00 0 100.00% _mtx_lock_sleep [1]
7.1 33844.00 14449.00 0 100.00% SHA256_Transform [2]
4.2 42408.00 8564.00 0 100.00% DELAY [3]
3.5 49583.00 7175.00 0 100.00% kern_select [4]
3.4 56565.00 6982.00 0 100.00% syscall [5]
3.2 63104.00 6539.00 0 100.00% sopoll_generic [6]
2.9 69125.00 6021.00 0 100.00% Xfast_syscall [7]
2.7 74615.00 5490.00 0 100.00% bcopy [8]
2.6 79947.00 5332.00 0 100.00% swi_net [9]
2.2 84515.00 4568.00 0 100.00% critical_exit [10]
1.9 88438.00 3923.00 0 100.00% netisr_poll [11]
1.8 92179.00 3741.00 0 100.00% spinlock_exit [12]
1.8 95882.00 3703.00 0 100.00% copyout [13]
1.7 99343.00 3461.00 0 100.00% _thread_lock_flags
[14]
1.6 102581.00 3238.00 0 100.00% uma_zfree_arg [15]
1.4 105358.00 2777.00 0 100.00% spinlock_enter [16]
1.2 107897.00 2539.00 0 100.00% rn_match [17]
1.2 110369.00 2472.00 0 100.00% soreceive_generic [18]
1.2 112814.00 2445.00 0 100.00%
intr_event_schedule_thread [19]
1.2 115194.00 2380.00 0 100.00% uma_zalloc_arg [20]
1.1 117417.00 2223.00 0 100.00% netisr_pollmore [21]
1.0 119444.00 2027.00 0 100.00% selrecord [22]
1.0 121450.00 2006.00 0 100.00% copyin [23]
1.0 123397.00 1947.00 0 100.00% cpu_switch [24]
Here are the full output:
http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind94-performance-fbsd6vs7-20080403/
At first glimpse it seems that there is a lot more time spent in
_mtx_lock_sleep in FreeBSD 7 than in FreeBSD 6...
--
Attila Nagy e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Free Software Network (FSN.HU) phone: +3630 306 6758
http://www.fsn.hu/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
