Ok, must be something specific to Dell hardware, then.  All our servers are 
Dells of varying models.  ipmitool sdr runs fine w/1.8.9, slow as molaasses 
w/1.8.11

--- On Fri, 3/26/10, Seger, Mark <mark.se...@hp.com> wrote:

From: Seger, Mark <mark.se...@hp.com>
Subject: RE: [Ipmitool-devel] performance questions
To: "John Philips" <johnphilip...@yahoo.com>, 
"Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" <Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Date: Friday, March 26, 2010, 9:53 AM




 
 






I tried both w/ and w/o cache.  In both cases the runtime for 10
iterations were about 20 seconds.  The same as the latest version. 

-mark 

   







From: John Philips
[mailto:johnphilip...@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 10:53 AM

To: Seger, Mark; Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Subject: RE: [Ipmitool-devel] performance questions 





   


 
  
  Mark,

  

  Try it again without the cache and see if there's any difference.  I've
  never used the cache feature before.

  

  --- On Fri, 3/26/10, Seger, Mark <mark.se...@hp.com>
  wrote: 
  

  From: Seger, Mark <mark.se...@hp.com>

  Subject: RE: [Ipmitool-devel] performance questions

  To: "Seger, Mark" <mark.se...@hp.com>, "John
  Philips" <johnphilip...@yahoo.com>,
  "Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
  <Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

  Date: Friday, March 26, 2010, 7:32 AM 
  
  
  No
  difference w/ 1.8.9: 
    
  before 
  [r...@hpdc3d001
  tmp]# time for i in `seq 1 10`; do ipmitool -S xxx sdr >/dev/null; done 
  real   
  0m19.511s 
  user   
  0m0.006s 
  sys    
  0m0.012s 
    
  after 
    
  [r...@hpdc3d001
  ipmitool-1.8.9]# ipmitool -V 
  ipmitool
  version 1.8.9  
  [r...@hpdc3d001
  ipmitool-1.8.9]# time for i in `seq 1 10`; do ipmitool -S xxx sdr
  >/dev/null; done 
  real
  0m19.212s 
  user
  0m0.005s 
  sys
  0m0.008s 
    
  
  
  
  From: Seger, Mark 

  Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 10:15 AM

  To: John Philips; Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

  Subject: Re: [Ipmitool-devel] performance questions 
  
  
    
    
    
  
  
  
  From: John Philips
  [mailto:johnphilip...@yahoo.com] 

  Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 9:57 AM

  To: Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

  Subject: Re: [Ipmitool-devel] performance questions 
  
  
    
  
   
    
    I'm seeing the same problem.  My systems are Dell PowerEdge
    servers running Gentoo.  When using ipmitool 1.8.9, the sdr displays
    everything in under a minute.  After upgrading to 1.8.11, it takes
    over 3 minutes.  If I downgrade back to 1.8.9 the problem goes away,
    so clearly it's caused by something within ipmitool. 
      
    [mjs]  - interesting.  I’m right in the middle at
    1.8.10, so maybe the problem (if it is with ipmitool) was introduced
    there?  I’ll have to see if I can get a copy of 1.8.9, try it and
    report back. 
    

    --- On Thu, 3/25/10, Seger, Mark <mark.se...@hp.com>
    wrote: 
    

    From: Seger, Mark <mark.se...@hp.com>

    Subject: [Ipmitool-devel] performance questions

    To: "Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
    <Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

    Date: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 5:01 AM 
    
    
    I’ve been using ipmitool inside my collectl monitoring tool for some
    time now and it’s been fairly efficient, thanks to some optimizations from
    this mailing list.  However I’ve recently noticed it’s gotten much
    slower and I don’t know if something has changed OR if it’s the actual
    hardware architecture that’s doing this. 
      
    Specifically I’m running 1.8.10 
      
    Before running it I do: 
    ipmitool sdr dump xxx 
    followed by 
    ipmitool –S xxx sdr 
      
    while it’s using very little cpu time, it IS using a lot of elapsed
    time which makes me wonder if it is something about the system
    configuration.  I do know for a fact that when I first started using
    it with the cache, the cache I was able to get the runtimes much lower. 
      
    My reason for asking is I do a mix of monitoring activities with
    collectl and gather the ipmi data only every couple of minutes, but I
    something use a monitoring interval of 1 second for the other data and the
    slowness of ipmitool prevents this.  If it is what it is, so be it but
    I just want to make sure it’s not me. 
      
    -mark 
    
    
    

    -----Inline Attachment Follows----- 
    
    
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval

    Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs

    proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.

    See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.

    http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev 
    
    

    -----Inline Attachment Follows----- 
    
    _______________________________________________

    Ipmitool-devel mailing list

    Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel 
    
    
   
  
    
  
  
  
  
  
 


   





 




      
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Ipmitool-devel mailing list
Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel

Reply via email to