Did you ever think CPU accounting might be slightly different? Unless you know how to really profile the app I'd defer to the wisdom of others.
On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 18:16, SN wrote: > Okay, I want to summarize my experience with kernel 2.6 now. > > I upgraded to the 2.6 final yesterday and ran some tests yesterday and all > day today. > First of all, kernel 2.6 worked fine, no crashes , all my drivers worked all > my apps worked, all my hardware worked. > > Test with overnet however revealed some issues, overnets CPU time usage is > much higher with kernel 2.6. > > The first test I ran was overnet with glibc without nptl, overnet used about > twice as much cpu time as before with kernel 2.4. > For the second test I installed linux-headers 2.6-beta11 and compiled glibc > with nptl (use flag nptl was set), the result stayed the same. > > So overnet used about 15-20% cpu time with kernel 2.6 , with 2.4 it was > around 5-10% . > > To be able to compare the two results I ran the tests for hours and compared > the cpu time whenever overnet build up aproximately the same number of tcp > connections(measured with netstat) and the same number of openfiles(measured > with lsof). > Another effect: > After compiling in nptl I noticed, that top gets confused by nptl the values > it shows are not correct anymore. For example while compiling the > accumulated cpu time is 90% but the compile process cc1 shows that it is > using 2-5% cpu time and all other processes show about 0%, cc1 normally is > around 90% while compiling, I upgraded procps to the latest release because > top belongs to procps, but that didn't help it. So top is not working > corectly with nptl. > > > Although the system seems very responsive now I think something is wrong > with 2.6 > I'm not really sure what causes this, it could be due to the new TCP Stack, > a result of the new sheduling, or thread handling. Who knows??? > > I would love to see a discussion about that and maybe some other tests with > other applications, for example a webserver or database server under high > load. > > GrÃÃe Stefan > > > > > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
