Hi Илья,
I didn't have much success with Google Perf Tools.
I've tried both with adding '-lprofiler' to LDFLAGS when building HAProxy
and with LD_PRELOAD.
In both cases on ARM64 it fails with: terminated by signal SIGSEGV (Address
boundary error)
On x86_64 there is no such issue but the produced result file is always
empty.
$ ldd haproxy
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffcfb5cd000)
libprofiler.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libprofiler.so.0
(0x00007f2115507000) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
libcrypt.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcrypt.so.1
(0x00007f21154cc000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libz.so.1 (0x00007f21154b0000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0x00007f21154aa000)
librt.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/librt.so.1 (0x00007f211549f000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0
(0x00007f211547c000)
libssl.so.1.1 => /home/ubuntu/opt/lib/libssl.so.1.1
(0x00007f21151e6000)
libcrypto.so.1.1 => /home/ubuntu/opt/lib/libcrypto.so.1.1
(0x00007f2114cf4000)
liblua5.3.so.0 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/liblua5.3.so.0
(0x00007f2114cb9000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x00007f2114b6a000)
libsystemd.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libsystemd.so.0
(0x00007f2114abd000)
libpcreposix.so.3 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpcreposix.so.3
(0x00007f2114ab8000)
libpcre.so.3 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpcre.so.3
(0x00007f2114a43000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgcc_s.so.1
(0x00007f2114a28000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f2114836000)
libunwind.so.8 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libunwind.so.8
(0x00007f2114819000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6
(0x00007f2114638000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f211552e000)
liblzma.so.5 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/liblzma.so.5
(0x00007f211460f000)
liblz4.so.1 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/liblz4.so.1
(0x00007f21145ee000)
libgcrypt.so.20 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgcrypt.so.20
(0x00007f21144d0000)
libgpg-error.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgpg-error.so.0
(0x00007f21144ad000)
CPUPROFILE=/tmp/haproxy-load-x64.prof haproxy -p pid.txt -f haproxy.cfg
The above command creates /tmp/haproxy-load-x64.prof but it is never
populated with any data. I've tried stopping HAProxy with signals INT, KILL
and TERM.
I even tried with env var CPUPROFILESIGNAL=12 to start/stop the profiler
manually but again no success.
I could share with you reports from Linux 'perf' command. Just let me know
which events you'd be interested in!
Regards,
Martin
On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 11:40 AM Илья Шипицин <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello, Martin!
>
> Can you please compare load profiles using google perftools ?
>
> I never tried to use gperf on ARM64, also, my trial at Linaro is over, I
> do not have an access to any ARM64 anymore.
> in short, gperf can be found https://github.com/gperftools/gperftools
>
> please follow "CPU profiling part".
>
> it can collect cachegrind output, I attached example kcachegrind report
> (you can sort by "self" time).
> it would be interesting to compare amd64 <--> arm64
>
> [image: Screenshot from 2020-07-18 13-35-27.png]
>
>
> пт, 10 июл. 2020 г. в 19:00, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>:
>
>> Hello HAProxy community,
>>
>> I wanted to compare how the newly released HAProxy 2.2 (Congrats!)
>> behaves under heavy load so I've ran some tests on my x86_64 and aarch64
>> VMs:
>>
>>
>> https://medium.com/@martin.grigorov/compare-haproxy-performance-on-x86-64-and-arm64-cpu-architectures-bfd55d1d5566
>>
>> Without much surprise the x86_64 VM gave better results!
>>
>> It is *not* a real use case scenario: the backends serve on GET / and
>> return "Hello World", without any file/network operations.
>>
>> What is interesting though is that I can get 120-160K reqs/sec when
>> hitting directly one of the backend servers, and only 20-40K reqs/sec when
>> using HAProxy as a load balancer in front of them.
>>
>> I'd be happy to re-run the tests with any kind of improvements you may
>> have!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Martin
>>
>
