Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-12 Thread DAve
DAve wrote: Chuck Swiger wrote: It might be reasonable to try hyperthreading enabled, as your type of load might be improved by it on Funny that, enabling hyperthreading immediately dropped my load by half, I see CPU0, CPU1, CPU2, CPU3 now in top. I also see my CPU load reporting

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-12 Thread Chuck Swiger
On May 12, 2008, at 2:27 PM, DAve wrote: On a related note, I met Chuck back in 1999 in Seattle at a SeaFug meeting. I doubt he remembers me but he and John Polstra coached me through changing from a Mac Admin to a BSD admin. I've read Chuck's posts on multiple maillists that we both have,

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-10 Thread Wojciech Puchar
and what most unix users do. It is what a lot of unix users have done historically, but now that there is and still most do. It's not a Unix way versus Other OS Way thing -- its a response to the change in direction hardware development has taken over the past several years. Chip on

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-10 Thread Matthew Seaman
Wojciech Puchar wrote: It depends very much on the application load you have to support and the sort of hardware you have available. For the sort of multicore chips that are all the rage nowadays, I'd go with 7.0 every time, even running single threaded applications. did you actually made

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-10 Thread Wojciech Puchar
but just run 100 different things and check how responsive machine is. My experience is of dealing with servers where each machine typically has a small number of important applications -- frequently only /one/ application so why you need unix at all? :) I can't speak to the model of

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-10 Thread Matthew Seaman
Wojciech Puchar wrote: but just run 100 different things and check how responsive machine is. My experience is of dealing with servers where each machine typically has a small number of important applications -- frequently only /one/ application so why you need unix at all? :) At the risk

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-10 Thread Wojciech Puchar
At the risk of belabouring the obvious: i) I like the price. Free. no system is free too ;) iii) I like the efficiency of the OS -- you get that much more performance out of every machine it's like having additional servers for free. single app writen for bare hardware would be the

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-10 Thread Mel
On Saturday 10 May 2008 09:10:37 Wojciech Puchar wrote: and what most unix users do. It is what a lot of unix users have done historically, but now that there is and still most do. It's not a Unix way versus Other OS Way thing -- its a response to the change in direction hardware

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Matthew Seaman
DAve wrote: Good morning. I recently upgraded our two email gateways from 4.8 to 6.2. The required software was upgraded as well which consists of MailScanner and Sendmail. Both had been keep up to date so it was not a jump in required resources. The issue I am seeing is that my server

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Chuck Swiger
On May 9, 2008, at 8:54 AM, DAve wrote: The issue I am seeing is that my server load, under the same traffic load, has increased 4 times or more. Where previously we saw a high load on the servers of 5 to 8, we are now seeing 14 to 17. Since the upgrade Sendmail has begun to timeout

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Wojciech Puchar
software was upgraded as well which consists of MailScanner and Sendmail. Both had been keep up to date so it was not a jump in required resources. The issue I am seeing is that my server load, under the same traffic load, has increased 4 times or more. Where previously we saw a high load on

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Wojciech Puchar
FreeBSD 6.2 is I believe slower than 4.11 for single processor systems and processes which pretty much run single threaded -- ie. exactly what you're trying to run. This would cause exactly the sort of symptoms you're seeing. and what most unix users do. Try 7.0 instead -- it has all of the

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Chuck Swiger
On May 9, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Try 7.0 instead -- it has all of the speed at multi-threaded, multi- core type stuff but has also regained the sort of performance levels you could so 4.11 is fastest? For single-processor systems, FreeBSD 4.11 does very well at a lot of

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread DAve
Wojciech Puchar wrote: software was upgraded as well which consists of MailScanner and Sendmail. Both had been keep up to date so it was not a jump in required resources. The issue I am seeing is that my server load, under the same traffic load, has increased 4 times or more. Where

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread DAve
Wojciech Puchar wrote: FreeBSD 6.2 is I believe slower than 4.11 for single processor systems and processes which pretty much run single threaded -- ie. exactly what you're trying to run. This would cause exactly the sort of symptoms you're seeing. and what most unix users do. Try 7.0

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread DAve
Chuck Swiger wrote: On May 9, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Try 7.0 instead -- it has all of the speed at multi-threaded, multi-core type stuff but has also regained the sort of performance levels you could so 4.11 is fastest? For single-processor systems, FreeBSD 4.11 does

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Chuck Swiger
On May 9, 2008, at 11:55 AM, DAve wrote: For single-processor systems, FreeBSD 4.11 does very well at a lot of tasks. However, Dave apparently has a 4-CPU system (~8 threads if he enabled hyperthreading), and for real SMP hardware, more recent versions of FreeBSD generally perform better

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread DAve
Chuck Swiger wrote: On May 9, 2008, at 11:55 AM, DAve wrote: For single-processor systems, FreeBSD 4.11 does very well at a lot of tasks. However, Dave apparently has a 4-CPU system (~8 threads if he enabled hyperthreading), and for real SMP hardware, more recent versions of FreeBSD

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread DAve
Chuck Swiger wrote: On May 9, 2008, at 8:54 AM, DAve wrote: The issue I am seeing is that my server load, under the same traffic load, has increased 4 times or more. Where previously we saw a high load on the servers of 5 to 8, we are now seeing 14 to 17. Since the upgrade Sendmail has begun

Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load

2008-05-09 Thread Matthew Seaman
Wojciech Puchar wrote: FreeBSD 6.2 is I believe slower than 4.11 for single processor systems and processes which pretty much run single threaded -- ie. exactly what you're trying to run. This would cause exactly the sort of symptoms you're seeing. Actually I was mistaken: I saw 4.11 and