Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

I've looked at this issue some more and it appears to me that sched_pickcpu() is never called for CPU-bound threads that use up their slices completely and never do any voluntary switches. A result of this is that the threads stay on their initial CPU until re-balance mechanism kicks in. There a

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Abdriy Gapon wrote: > on 31/07/2011 22:03 Rick Macklem said the following: > > Ok, so if the scheduler spin lock is being held too long, what could > > cause this, if it isn't a scheduler bug? > > > > I can't think of how NFS would affect this beyond causing a heavy > > I/O > > load, but if there i

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 31/07/2011 22:03 Rick Macklem said the following: > Ok, so if the scheduler spin lock is being held too long, what could > cause this, if it isn't a scheduler bug? > > I can't think of how NFS would affect this beyond causing a heavy I/O > load, but if there is some way it does, I suppose I nee

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

t; problems. There can be issues with the scheduler making sub-optimal > scheduling > decisions. > > > --> The bug might be some case where the spin lock isn't being > > released > > when it should be, and that "could" result in "Heavy I/O blocks &

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

spin lock isn't being released > when it should be, and that "could" result in "Heavy I/O blocks > FreeBSD box for several seconds". Note that the server was under > heavy I/O load when this panic occurred. > > >> A panic is a panic. >&g

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

his panic is a result of holding the spin lock too long, that it might be another symptom of the same problem as when the scheduler seems to "lock up" for several seconds. --> The bug might be some case where the spin lock isn't being released when it should be, and that &

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 26/07/2011 00:44 Rick Macklem said the following: > hrs sent me this panic. I'm wondering if it might be relevant to this? To 'this' what? A panic is a panic. > spin lock 0x80cb52c0 (sched lock 1) held by 0xff0012c7f8c0 (tid > 100317) too long > panic: spin lock held too long I g

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Do you have a corefile for this panic? Attilio 2011/7/25 Rick Macklem : > Steve Kargl wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 01:00:27PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> > on 12/07/2011 11:05 Andriy Gapon said the following: >> > > I think that the best thing you can further provide (as objective >> > > e

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Steve Kargl wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 01:00:27PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > on 12/07/2011 11:05 Andriy Gapon said the following: > > > I think that the best thing you can further provide (as objective > > > evidence for > > > the problem at hand) is ktr(4) traces for at least KTR_SCHED m

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 01:00:27PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 12/07/2011 11:05 Andriy Gapon said the following: > > I think that the best thing you can further provide (as objective evidence > > for > > the problem at hand) is ktr(4) traces for at least KTR_SCHED mask. Perhaps > > you > > e

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 12/07/2011 11:05 Andriy Gapon said the following: > I think that the best thing you can further provide (as objective evidence for > the problem at hand) is ktr(4) traces for at least KTR_SCHED mask. Perhaps > you > even already have them from your previous sessions with Jeff. > > P.S. This i

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Ulrich Spörlein wrote: ... >> Having a project adopted way of sharing work in progress will be a step >> forward. Yes, I'm aware of perforce, it's to hard to use and wasn't >> designed to share and test ideas. I think guthub can be a very good >> candidate (but AFA

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed, 13.07.2011 at 00:40:49 +0300, Gleb Kurtsou wrote: > On (11/07/2011 16:36), m...@freebsd.org wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ali Mashtizadeh > > wrote: > > > Maybe someone can setup something like reviewboard [1] for developers > > > to use. This may also help folks who want to

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On (11/07/2011 16:36), m...@freebsd.org wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ali Mashtizadeh > wrote: > > Maybe someone can setup something like reviewboard [1] for developers > > to use. This may also help folks who want to keep abreast of the > > current work in a particular subsystem or g

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/12/11 20:10, Matt wrote: Sic... If you allow me the comparison, FreeBSD development is as open as are the US (and, to some extend, most western country) borders nowadays open to aliens, and believe me, this is not a compliment. - Arnaud I like the comment, although I disagree. In so

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Sic... If you allow me the comparison, FreeBSD development is as open as are the US (and, to some extend, most western country) borders nowadays open to aliens, and believe me, this is not a compliment. - Arnaud ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org maili

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 7:36 PM, wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ali Mashtizadeh > wrote: >> Maybe someone can setup something like reviewboard [1] for developers >> to use. This may also help folks who want to keep abreast of the >> current work in a particular subsystem or get

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 11/07/2011 19:16 Steve Kargl said the following: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 06:07:04PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> But it's not clear which of the processes are slaves and which is master. >> It's also not clear why the master takes so much CPU (on par with the >> slaves) - >> from my reading o

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 12/07/2011 00:48 Arnaud Lacombe said the following: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> on 11/07/2011 23:33 Arnaud Lacombe said the following: >>> For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_ >>> patch *before* it is checked in, as a stro

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

m...@freebsd.org wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ali Mashtizadeh > wrote: > > Maybe someone can setup something like reviewboard [1] for > > developers > > to use. This may also help folks who want to keep abreast of the > > current work in a particular subsystem or get involved into the

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ali Mashtizadeh wrote: > Maybe someone can setup something like reviewboard [1] for developers > to use. This may also help folks who want to keep abreast of the > current work in a particular subsystem or get involved into the > development process more. At my com

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Maybe someone can setup something like reviewboard [1] for developers to use. This may also help folks who want to keep abreast of the current work in a particular subsystem or get involved into the development process more. At my company we use reviews and it seems to help the catch some bugs and

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 05:50:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Steve Kargl > > wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > >>> > >>> For the record, I wo

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, [re-sent publicly, I did not "Replied-to-all":)] On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Steve Kargl > wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >>> >>> For the record, I would like to see enforced pub

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 11/07/2011 23:33 Arnaud Lacombe said the following: >> For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_ >> patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is >> particularly interesting. But it is no

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >> >> For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_ >> patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is >> particularly interesting. B

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 11/07/2011 23:33 Arnaud Lacombe said the following: > For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_ > patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is > particularly interesting. But it is not likely to happen in FreeBSD > where FreeBSD committers are cle

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 04:33:44PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > > For the record, I would like to see enforced public review for _every_ > patch *before* it is checked in, as a strong rule. gcc system is > particularly interesting. But it is not likely to happen in FreeBSD > where FreeBSD commit

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > (OT, yes, but I'd like to take a stab at explaining "why" these things > fall to the wayside..) > > On 7 July 2011 12:08, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > >> What would be the point to even start looking at an issue? You guys >> (by "you", I mean

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 11 July 2011 17:07, Andriy Gapon wrote: > Yeah, but what problem is demonstrated here? > Are we confident that non-even workload is inherently bad? > E.g.: > 79.39 + .. + 77.59 < 5 * 80 = 400 > 100.00 + ... + 55.18 ~~ 402 which is more than theoretically possible :-) > So it would _appear_ tha

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:42:02PM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > That top output is averaged and slow to adjust. > Using "top" as an indication as to what's really going on is likely > not a good idea. > Restoring top output here: > PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIMEC

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 06:07:04PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 11/07/2011 17:41 Ivan Voras said the following: > > On 07/07/2011 22:08, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > >> 4BSD kernel gives for N = Ncpu + 1. > >> > >> 34 processes: 6 running, 28 sleeping > >> > >>PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

That top output is averaged and slow to adjust. Using "top" as an indication as to what's really going on is likely not a good idea. 2c, Adrian ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To un

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 11/07/2011 17:41 Ivan Voras said the following: > On 07/07/2011 22:08, Steve Kargl wrote: > >> 4BSD kernel gives for N = Ncpu + 1. >> >> 34 processes: 6 running, 28 sleeping >> >>PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIMECPU COMMAND >> 1417 kargl 1 710 370

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/07/2011 22:08, Steve Kargl wrote: 4BSD kernel gives for N = Ncpu + 1. 34 processes: 6 running, 28 sleeping PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIMECPU COMMAND 1417 kargl 1 710 370M 294M RUN 0 1:30 79.39% sasmp 1416 kargl 1 710

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

(OT, yes, but I'd like to take a stab at explaining "why" these things fall to the wayside..) On 7 July 2011 12:08, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > What would be the point to even start looking at an issue? You guys > (by "you", I mean "official" committers on public list) don't care When someone who h

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Jul 7, 2011, at 3:51 PM, Hartmann, O. wrote: > This is quibbling. On heavy loads on networ, disk et cetera, isn't there > always and also a CPU bound load? No. Properly written software blocks when waiting on network or disk I/O, and doesn't sit there spinning in a busy-wait consuming CPU un

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/07/11 09:27, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 06/07/2011 21:11 Nathan Whitehorn said the following: On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote: AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue. If I launch n+1 MPI images on a system with n cpus/cores, then 2 (and sometimes 3) images are stuck on a cpu and those 2 (or

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/07/11 09:04, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 07/07/2011 06:11 Steve Kargl said the following: Unfortunately, I have neither the brain capacity and time nor the money to fix the issue. To solve OP's problem in the short, the simplest solution may be to switch to 4BSD. Let's face, ULE is not a silv

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:42:39PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 07/07/2011 18:14 Steve Kargl said the following: >> >> I'm using OpenMPI. These are N > Ncpu processes not threads, > > I used 'thread' in a sense of a kernel thread. It shouldn't > actually matter if it's a process or a thread i

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 07/07/2011 18:14 Steve Kargl said the following: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:27:53AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> on 06/07/2011 21:11 Nathan Whitehorn said the following: >>> On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote: AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue. If I launch n+1 MPI images on a sy

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Steve Kargl < s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:27:53AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > on 06/07/2011 21:11 Nathan Whitehorn said the following: > > > On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote: > > >> AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:27:53AM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 06/07/2011 21:11 Nathan Whitehorn said the following: > > On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote: > >> AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue. If I launch n+1 MPI images > >> on a system with n cpus/cores, then 2 (and sometimes 3) images

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 06/07/2011 20:11, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: I've seen exactly this problem with multi-threaded math libraries, as well. Using parallel GotoBLAS on FreeBSD gives terrible performance because the threads keep migrating between CPUs, causing frequent cache misses. On both schedulers? __

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 06/07/2011 19:05, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message<20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl w rites: I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the last three years. Nothing has changed. I even set up an account on one node in my cluster for jef

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Steve Kargl wrote: > Let's face, ULE is not a silver bullet. Or perhaps it is, but this particular problem is so heavily armored as to demand depleted uranium :) ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/fre

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 06/07/2011 21:11 Nathan Whitehorn said the following: > On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote: >> AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue. If I launch n+1 MPI images >> on a system with n cpus/cores, then 2 (and sometimes 3) images >> are stuck on a cpu and those 2 (or 3) images ping-pong on that >>

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 06/07/2011 21:00 Steve Kargl said the following: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> In message <20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve >> Kargl w >> rites: >> >>> I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the >>> last t

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 07/07/2011 06:11 Steve Kargl said the following: > Unfortunately, I have neither the brain capacity and time nor > the money to fix the issue. To solve OP's problem in the > short, the simplest solution may be to switch to 4BSD. Let's > face, ULE is not a silver bullet. I think that piling u

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/07/11 06:29, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/06/11 23:49, Oliver Pinter wrote: On 7/6/11, Hartmann, O. wrote: On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed? >>> >> >> steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME >> >> And, 4BSD works. > > I meant it as a

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:39:00AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed? > >> > > > > steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME > > > > And, 4BSD works. > > I me

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 7 July 2011 09:51, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: >> Offer a bounty for getting it fixed? >> > > steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME > > And, 4BSD works. I meant it as a more general observation. If something doesn't work as needed, consid

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:51AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Offer a bounty for getting it fixed? > steve == ENOMONEY && jeffr == ENOTIME And, 4BSD works. -- Steve ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listi

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Offer a bounty for getting it fixed? thanks, Adrian On 7 July 2011 05:00, Hartmann, O. wrote: > On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl >>>  wrote: O

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 7/6/11, Hartmann, O. wrote: > On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl >>> wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: > I use SCHED_UL

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/06/11 21:36, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing b

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:18:35PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: > >> > >> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing > >> better on multicor

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Hi, On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: >> >> I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing >> better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching >> back to the old SCHED_4B

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message<20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl w rites: I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the last three years. Nothing has changed.

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl > w > rites: > > >I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the > >last three years. Nothing has changed. I even set up an account

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

In message <20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl w rites: >I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the >last three years. Nothing has changed. I even set up an account >on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use. He was too busy to >investigate a

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 06:38:23PM +0200, Hartmann, O. wrote: > On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote: > >On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: > >>I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing > >>better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of sugge

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/06/11 18:28, Steve Kargl wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler. If you are usin

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:29:24PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: > > I use SCHED_ULE on all machines, since it is supposed to be performing > better on multicore boxes, but there are lots of suggestions switching > back to the old SCHED_4BSD scheduler. > If you are using MPI in numerical codes, th

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

Has anyone re-run those IO benchmarks? Something smells fishy there.. (with the benchmarking.) adrian 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann : > On 07/06/11 12:37, arrowdodger wrote: >> >> 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann >> >>> When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" >>> or >>> when checking

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 06/07/2011 18:33 O. Hartmann said the following: > On 07/06/11 14:35, arrowdodger wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> >>> Just curious what your current value of sysctl kern.sched.preempt_thresh >>> is. >>> And if it's not 224 and if you haven't tried 224 yet, then

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/06/11 14:35, arrowdodger wrote: On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: Just curious what your current value of sysctl kern.sched.preempt_thresh is. And if it's not 224 and if you haven't tried 224 yet, then could you please try it and see if there is any improvement? This a

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On 07/06/11 12:37, arrowdodger wrote: 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or when compilin

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed Jul 6 11, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 06/07/2011 16:33 Alexander Best said the following: > > you might also want to try enabling options IPI_PREEMPTION. no idea, if this > > improves your situation, though. > > Just in case, this option has effect for 4BSD scheduler only. thanks. i did not

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 06/07/2011 16:33 Alexander Best said the following: > you might also want to try enabling options IPI_PREEMPTION. no idea, if this > improves your situation, though. Just in case, this option has effect for 4BSD scheduler only. -- Andriy Gapon ___ f

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 06/07/2011 15:35 arrowdodger said the following: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Andriy Gapon > wrote: > > Just curious what your current value of sysctl kern.sched.preempt_thresh > is. > And if it's not 224 and if you haven't tried 224 yet, then could you

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed Jul 6 11, arrowdodger wrote: > 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann > > > When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or > > when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large > > data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > Just curious what your current value of sysctl kern.sched.preempt_thresh > is. > And if it's not 224 and if you haven't tried 224 yet, then could you please > try > it and see if there is any improvement? > > This assumes that you use SCHED_UL

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

on 06/07/2011 13:37 arrowdodger said the following: > 2011/7/6 O. Hartmann > >> When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or >> when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large >> data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical mo

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011/7/6 O. Hartmann > When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or > when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large > data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or > when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD

Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

2011/7/6 O. Hartmann : Could you post /etc/sysctl.conf and /boot/loader.conf? Also, the output of uname -a on all machines would be nice. And since you don't use GENERIC, could you also tell us what difference your setup is from a GENERIC kernel? -- chs,

Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds

When performing an update on the ports tree via "portsnap fetch update" or when checking out (or) large Subversion repositories or when copying large data files (~ 50 to 250 GB in size, results from numerical modelings) or when compiling world, FreeBD 9.0 and FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE tend to "freeze"