Hello Thierry,
 
sorry for my short reply, i am not in the office this week.
I can confirm that all my test run several times, the first run is always 
slower because of the empty cache. The mentioned results are all average values 
without first run.
The problem occured on all tested 2.x versions. I found it on 2.0.17 but can 
also  observe it also on newest 2.3.2.
Next week I can send you the dse.ldif for analysis.

best regards
Claas
 

Gesendet: Montag, 27. März 2023 um 11:26 Uhr
Von: "Thierry Bordaz" <[email protected]>
An: "General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project." 
<[email protected]>, "Claas Vieler" <[email protected]>
Betreff: [389-users] Re: 2.x query performance problem
Hi Claas,
Rereading that thread I have a doubt regarding cache priming. The search 
returns ~500 groups. The first lookup of those groups is significantly longer 
because of entry cache priming.
Could you confirm that if you do twice the same search (1.4 and 2.x), the 
second search in 1.4 is much faster that the second search on 2.x ?
best regards
thierry

On 3/16/23 09:38, Claas Vieler wrote:

Hello William

 
I cant see any difference expect duration
 
best regards
Claas
 

389-Directory/2.3.2 B2023.073.0958
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:51.321404978 +0100] conn=51 fd=66 slot=66 connection from 
local to /run/slapd-389ds.socket
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:51.323985845 +0100] conn=51 AUTOBIND dn="cn=root"
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:51.325995690 +0100] conn=51 op=0 BIND dn="cn=root" 
method=sasl version=3 mech=EXTERNAL
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:51.328098136 +0100] conn=51 op=0 RESULT err=0 tag=97 
nentries=0 wtime=0.000082030 optime=0.004197632 etime=0.004276581 dn="cn=root"
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:51.328272655 +0100] conn=51 op=1 SRCH 
base="dc=example,dc=com" scope=2 
filter="(uniqueMember=cn=testuser1,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com)" 
attrs="distinguishedName"
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:52.285988416 +0100] conn=51 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=101 
nentries=532 wtime=0.000077055 optime=0.957714945 etime=0.957784949
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:52.286275743 +0100] conn=51 op=2 UNBIND
[16/Mar/2023:08:24:52.291936625 +0100] conn=51 op=2 fd=66 Disconnect - Cleanly 
Closed Connection - U1
 
389-Directory/1.4.4.19 B2022.313.1200
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.353075132 +0100] conn=101 fd=64 slot=64 connection from 
local to /var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-389ds/slapd-389ds.socket
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.355714488 +0100] conn=101 AUTOBIND dn="cn=root"
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.357681511 +0100] conn=101 op=0 BIND dn="cn=root" 
method=sasl version=3 mech=EXTERNAL
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.359700165 +0100] conn=101 op=0 RESULT err=0 tag=97 
nentries=0 wtime=0.000036305 optime=0.004064382 etime=0.004098191 dn="cn=root"
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.359896870 +0100] conn=101 op=1 SRCH 
base="dc=example,dc=com" scope=2 
filter="(uniqueMember=cn=testuser1,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com)" 
attrs="distinguishedName"
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.367652447 +0100] conn=101 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=101 
nentries=532 wtime=0.000077477 optime=0.007755733 etime=0.007830994
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.369055287 +0100] conn=101 op=2 UNBIND
[16/Mar/2023:09:10:20.371940374 +0100] conn=101 op=2 fd=64 closed error - U1
 
 

Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. März 2023 um 03:41 Uhr
Von: "William Brown" <[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]]
An: 
"[email protected]"[mailto:[email protected]] 
<[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]]
Betreff: [389-users] Re: 2.x query performance problem
> got newest version from 
> https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base[https://github.com/389ds/389-ds-base] 
> dc565fd (389-Directory/2.3.2 B2023.073.0958 )
> I can confirm, manageDSAit makes no difference any more in query time,
> got etimes with 0,9 sec after import and reindexing (with and without option)
> but a little difference to 1.4.x ist still present :) ( 0.0x sec vs 0.9 sec)

Can we see the access log between the 1.4.x and 2.x version? There still seems 
to be a difference here which is curious :(


--
Sincerely,

William Brown

Senior Software Engineer,
Identity and Access Management
SUSE Labs, Australia
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 
[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]
To unsubscribe send an email to 
[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/[https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/]
List Guidelines: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines]
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected][https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue[https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue]
 
    
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 
[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]
To unsubscribe send an email to 
[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/[https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/]
List Guidelines: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines]
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected][https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue[https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue]
_______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 
[email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to 
[email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/[https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/]
 List Guidelines: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines]
 List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected][https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]]
 Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue[https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue]
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to