On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 02:56 -0300, Felipe Astroza Araya wrote:
> Good aproach. It's like a stack (LIFO) of sched_connections BUT I'd prefer a 
> linked list, because it's simpler. You could use just a "free list" and not 
> two arrays (stack and queue). When a connection is closed his 
> sched_connection is returned to the "free list" (head). 
> 

It seems to be this is an overkill and the optimization is too small. We
can always maintain a global variable with the size of current capacity
- since in a threaded context it would require locking which might lead
to contention. Another alternative is to keep a bitmap instead of a new
free_in_queue array. So the bitmap would have a size of work_capacity
each time a slot is occupied, the corresponding bit is set. Bitmaps are
O(1) as well and the overhead is just 1 bit per setting

> Another issue in mk_scheduler is mk_sched_get_connection(). This function is 
> called from mk_conn_write() and mk_sched_remove_client(). The 
> mk_sched_get_connection()'s complexity is O(work_capacity), is used two times 
> at least in connection life when it could be avoid completely. epoll_wait 
> returns a event array and Monkey uses the socket fd as epoll_event data. 
> That's wrong decision!, epoll_event data should be the sched_connection and 
> NOT the socket fd. It's possible to improve it, but need hard work.
> 
> El 26-03-2012, a las 1:22, Eduardo Silva escribió:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > thanks for the patch. Looking with valgrind seems to be optimized a
> > little bit, screenshot here:
> > 
> >       http://edsiper.linuxchile.cl/sched_optimization_001.png
> > 
> > without optimization mk_sched_register() takes 0.40 for 5000 calls,
> > the same situation but for an optimized code takes 0.36. Its an
> > improvement.
> > 
> > Dave, Zeus and Max, what do you think about the patch ?
> > 
> > cheers,
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 9:43 PM, Mahesh Gondi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> I made some changes to mk_scheduler.c. First I will explain in brief what I
> >> did before the results.
> >> 
> >> In mk_scheduler.c , the mk_sched_register_client serves the purpose of
> >> adding new client requests to the worker thread queue(everything discussed
> >> here happens in the thread context). Adding was done by iterating over the
> >> queue to looking for an available spot to be inserted. When the load on
> >> server is at near max, then this insertion cost rises to O(work_capacity).
> >> 
> >> Instead I maintained free spots on the queue(list of client requests
> >> received), in a simple array of size (work_capacity+1) with each element
> >> pointing to an index in queue(first element kept a count of number of free
> >> spots available). Array(arr) contains free spots as pointed by the index
> >> values stored at the position from 1 to arr[0]. Insertion now only takes a
> >> constant time. Hence this has contributed in running monkey a bit cheaper.
> >> Similar modifications are in progress, should help monkey run more and more
> >> faster . :)
> >> 
> >> Below are the results
> >> 
> >> Output I got for running with "siege -c 300 -t 30S 127.0.01:2001",
> >> 
> >> //WITH CONSTANT TIME INSERTION
> >> Transactions:                  18051 hits
> >> Availability:                 100.00 %
> >> Elapsed time:                  29.96 secs
> >> Data transferred:              23.48 MB
> >> Response time:                  0.00 secs
> >> Transaction rate:             602.50 trans/sec
> >> Throughput:                   0.78 MB/sec
> >> Concurrency:                    2.30
> >> Successful transactions:       18051
> >> Failed transactions:               0
> >> Longest transaction:            0.23
> >> Shortest transaction:           0.00
> >> 
> >> ============================================
> >> 
> >> //EARLIER
> >> Transactions:                  17711 hits
> >> Availability:                 100.00 %
> >> Elapsed time:                  30.01 secs
> >> Data transferred:              23.04 MB
> >> Response time:                  0.00 secs
> >> Transaction rate:             590.17 trans/sec
> >> Throughput:                     0.77 MB/sec
> >> Concurrency:                    1.18
> >> Successful transactions:       17711
> >> Failed transactions:               0
> >> Longest transaction:            0.17
> >> Shortest transaction:           0.00
> >> 
> >> i had taken output for each case just after a fresh restart. Reason for 
> >> only
> >> ~600 trans/sec is that it was run ec2 t1.small instance.
> >> 
> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >> mahesh gondi
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Monkey mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://lists.monkey-project.com/listinfo/monkey
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Eduardo Silva
> > http://edsiper.linuxchile.cl
> > http://www.monkey-project.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Monkey mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.monkey-project.com/listinfo/monkey
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Monkey mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.monkey-project.com/listinfo/monkey
> 


_______________________________________________
Monkey mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.monkey-project.com/listinfo/monkey

Reply via email to