Re: OS scheduler bugs affecting high-concurrency contention
От | Andrea Suisani |
---|---|
Тема | Re: OS scheduler bugs affecting high-concurrency contention |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5715F99C.4080000@opinioni.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | OS scheduler bugs affecting high-concurrency contention (Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 04/16/2016 04:15 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > There is a paper that any one interested in performance at high > concurrency, especially in Linux, should read[1]. While doing > other work, a group of researchers saw behavior that they suspected > was due to scheduler bugs in Linux. There were no tools that made > proving that practical, so they developed such a tool set and used > it to find four bugs in the Linux kernel which were introduced in > these releases, have not yet been fixed, and have this following > maximum impact when running NAS benchmarks, based on running with > and without the researchers' fixes for the bugs: > > 2.6.32: 22% > 2,6.38: 13x > 3.9: 27x > 3.19: 138x > > That's right -- one of these OS scheduler bugs in production > versions of Linux can make one of NASA's benchmarks run for 138 > times as long as it does without the bug. I don't feel that I can > interpret the results of any high-concurrency benchmarks in a > meaningful way without knowing which of these bugs were present in > the OS used for the benchmark. Just as an example, it is helpful > to know that the benchmarks Andres presented were run on 3.16, so > it would have three of these OS bugs affecting results, but not the > most severe one. I encourage you to read the paper an draw your > own conclusions. > > Anyway, please don't confuse this thread with the one on the > "snapshot too old" patch -- I am still working on that and will > post results there when they are ready. Thanks for the link, appreciated. On slightly related topic, Jens Axboe proposed a patchset [1] to improve the performance of background buffered writeback. On Lwn.net an article about the issue at hand has been recently published [2]. Maybe this work could somewhat solve the problem experienced by PostgreSQL users while checkpoint process flushes all pending changes to disk and recycles the transaction logs. -- Andrea Suisani suisani@opinioni.net Demetra opinioni.net srl [1] "[PATCHSET v3][RFC] Make background writeback not suck" http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2186732 [2] "Toward less-annoying background writeback" https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/682582/93d9e5b6bed03a32/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: