Thus spake Anders Mundt Due, on Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:49:33AM +0100: > On 10 Mar, Søren P. Skou wrote: > > > >is now happily chomping away, with a lot less load on the system overall. > > > >Without --disable-threads it would ever so often spike all 8 Cores, and > > > >it > > > >wasn't uncommon for it to have a load >2.0 - now it is sitting > > > >comfortably > > > >around 0.32. And it doesn't seem to have any impact on the system. > > > Still I would like to know what is taking all this time... ktrace it > > > and then kdump -R to display relative timestamps. > > anycast-dns-01# ldd /usr/pkg/sbin/named > > /usr/pkg/sbin/named: > > -llwres.141 => /usr/pkg/lib/liblwres.so.141 > > -lpthread.1 => /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1 > > > > even with --disable-threads it still links into phtreads it seems? > > Yeah, that was be having a bit of a fight with pkgsrc. Looks like I got > this one figured. Ah, that explained that one :) Anyhoo, since I had to put it back into production it is now running without phtread (as you said it would ;-) ). It has been running for nearly 7 hours without a hitch now.
A top with t shows this for named: 12583 1 named 85 kqueue/6 55:26 13.77% 13.77% - named Load on the machine hasn't passed over 0.20 in load yet, whereas a named with multithreading simply never got under 0.30 - Also, the machine seems a lot more responsive. As Andrea¿ Gustafsson said, he has been disabling threads on Named for quite a while now. Shouldn't it be more efficient having more threads? Provided of course that nothing actually blocks up :) Best Regards S. P. Skou -- GPG Key: 8E58ACB3
