Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ...
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26629.1097876674@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... (Mark Wong <markw@osdl.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ...
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Mark Wong <markw@osdl.org> writes: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:27:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hmm, in that case the cost deserves some further investigation. Can we >> find out just what that routine does and where it's being called from? > There's a call-graph feature with oprofile as of version 0.8 with > the opstack tool, but I'm having a terrible time figuring out why the > output isn't doing the graphing part. Otherwise, I'd have that > available already... I was wondering if this might be associated with do_sigaction. do_sigaction is only 0.23 percent of the runtime according to the oprofile results: http://khack.osdl.org/stp/298124/oprofile/DBT_2_Profile-all.oprofile.txt but the profile results for the same run: http://khack.osdl.org/stp/298124/profile/DBT_2_Profile-tick.sort show do_sigaction very high and recalc_sigpending_tsk nowhere at all. Something funny there. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: