Re: MP Perfomance
Simas Mockevicius <[email protected]> Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:23:17 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.smp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 07:50:43PM +1100, Simon Burge wrote: > "Zafer Aydogan" wrote: > > There is more kernel overhead in an MP kernel as more things need to be > locked, etc. For a single non-threaded program, you probably will get > better performance from a UP kernel. there a also some advantages, for example if your mysql process get 99% of one cpu, the second will be only 1-2%, and programs that runs on the second cpu will work quickly. 4 ex.: I have mail server 2x400Mhz, 512MB ram, with NetBSD -current, it is runing postfix with a lot of pcre stuff, also runing mysql for virtual mail users, (imap|imaps)/(pop3|pop3s). with the same software configuration, I have tested it on that MP server and one with UP (1.2Ghz, 512 MB RAM): when sending 10000 mails/s, the UP load averages runs in to about 140 !? :), and with MP - 70-80, and sends out mail after 5-7 minutes, UP - 15-20 minutes. So ... :) > Did you try "make -j N" for some value of N > 1? I use N = 2*ncpus > here - that seems to be about the sweet spot. yes, this option does job very well :) > In general, it's faster :) and as far as I calculated - faster a lot. -- Sincerely, Simas Mockevicius
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 186 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFAWrwFUtlifAEIUUgRAlsMAJ9EvhPbzUolZ33QKa+i2hGpu1CDuQCbBP5u cWPFWJL4bDecsCA4QU4NxFU= =AAjC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----