On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Jay Pipes <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 08:58 -0800, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Jay Pipes <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-01-06 at 17:04 +0100, Salvatore Orlando wrote: > > > I have already discussed the matter with Jay on IRC, even if > > for a > > > different issue. > > > In this specific case 'batching' will have the benefit of > > reducing the > > > rootwrap overhead. > > > > > > Right. > > > > > However, it seems the benefit from batching is not > > resolutive. I admit > > > I have not run tests in the gate with batching; I've just > > tested in an > > > environment without significant load, obtaining a > > performance increase > > > of less than 10%. > > > > > > Well, 10% is 10% better than nothing ;) And add in the > > (significant) > > rootwrap costs, and I think it's certainly worth looking into. > > > > Have you tried running neutron without rootwrap, to get a baseline? > > See: > > http://blog.gridcentric.com/bid/318277/Boosting-OpenStack-s-Parallel-Performance > > Specifically the section titled "Disable rootwrap scripts", > > What about it? Also those numbers are pretty old at this point. I was thinking disable rootwrap and run full parallel tempest against it. > Best, > -jay > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
