Hi.

Kris Kennaway wrote:
In the "good" case you are getting a much higher interrupt rate but with the data you provided I can't tell where from. You need to run vmstat -i at regular intervals (e.g. every 10 seconds for a minute) during the "good" and "bad" times, since it only provides counters and an average rate over the uptime of the system.

Now I'm running 10-process lighttpd and the problem became no so big.

I collected interrupt stats and it shows no relation beetween ionterrupts and slowdowns. Here is it:
http://83.167.98.162/gprof/intr-graph/

Also I have similiar statistics on mutex profiling and it shows there's no problem in mutexes. http://83.167.98.162/gprof/mtx-graph/mtxgifnew/

I have no idea what else to check.

I don't know what this graph is showing me :) When precisely is the system behaving poorly?
Take a look at "Disk Load %" picture at http://83.167.98.162/gprof/intr-graph/

At ~ 17:00, 03:00-04:00, 13:00-14:00, 00:30-01:30, 11:00-13:00 it shows peaks of disk activity which really never happen. As I said in the beginning of the thread in this "peak" moments disk becomes slow and vmstat shows 100% disk load while performing < 10 tps. Other grafs at this page shows that there's no relation to interrupts rate of amr or em device. You advised me to check it.

When I was using single-process lighttpd the problem was much harder as you can see at http://83.167.98.162/gprof/graph/ . At first picture on this page you can see disk load peaks at 18:00 and 15:00 which leaded to decreasing network output because disk was too slow.

Back in this thread we suspected UMA mutexes. In order to check it I collected mutex profiling stats and draw graphs over time and they also didn't show anything interesting. All mutex graphs were smooth while disk load peaks. http://83.167.98.162/gprof/mtx-graph/mtxgifnew/

With best regards,
Alexey Popov
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to