Re: [PERFORM] Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4

2009-03-15 Thread Scott Carey
Top posting because my email client will mess up the inline: Re: advance insert pointer. I have no idea how complicated that advance part is as you allude to. But can this be done without a lock at all? An atomic compare and exchange (or compare and set, etc) should do it. Although boundaries i

Re: [PERFORM] Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4

2009-03-15 Thread Jignesh K. Shah
Simon Riggs wrote: On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 16:53 -0400, Jignesh K. Shah wrote: 1200: 2000: Medium Throughput: -1781969.000 Avg Medium Resp: 0.019 I think you need to iron out bugs in your test script before we put too much stock into the results generated. Your throughput should not b

Re: [PERFORM] Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4

2009-03-15 Thread Jignesh K. Shah
decibel wrote: On Mar 11, 2009, at 10:48 PM, Jignesh K. Shah wrote: Fair enough.. Well I am now appealing to all who has a fairly decent sized hardware want to try it out and see whether there are "gains", "no-changes" or "regressions" based on your workload. Also it will help if you rep

Re: [PERFORM] Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4

2009-03-15 Thread Jignesh K. Shah
decibel wrote: On Mar 13, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Jignesh K. Shah wrote: vmstat seems similar to wakeup some kthr memorypagedisk faults cpu r b w swap free re mf pi po fr de sr s0 s1 s2 sd in sy cs us sy id 63 0 0 45535728 38689856 0 14 0 0 0