Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-14 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 10:57:01AM +0300, John Smith wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> When was this corrected? Is 6.2 going to be faster than 6.1?
> >
> >As I said earlier, some of the most important changes that went into
> >6.0 were fixing performance problems in 5.x.  Since then it's been a
> >process of polishing and improving, instead of architectural changes.
> >So 6.2 is expected to be "better" than 6.1 but probably not measurably
> >faster for general workloads.
> >
> >> Did the guys port the libthr changes into 6.2 or not?
> >
> >Dunno what you mean here.
> >
> >Kris
> 
> I mean the libthr threading library, MySQL works better with it in 6.1
> so I hope the last changes done by David Xu is ported to 6.2

Dunno, you can check CVS or ask David.

Kris

pgpv6QjvlnY6h.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread John Smith

On 11/14/06, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> When was this corrected? Is 6.2 going to be faster than 6.1?

As I said earlier, some of the most important changes that went into
6.0 were fixing performance problems in 5.x.  Since then it's been a
process of polishing and improving, instead of architectural changes.
So 6.2 is expected to be "better" than 6.1 but probably not measurably
faster for general workloads.

> Did the guys port the libthr changes into 6.2 or not?

Dunno what you mean here.

Kris


I mean the libthr threading library, MySQL works better with it in 6.1
so I hope the last changes done by David Xu is ported to 6.2

Thank you,

-J
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:27:47AM +0300, John Smith wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:51:49PM -0800, Jeff Mohler wrote:
> >> Fair to say that those tools should be recompiled on a 6 system to
> >> ensure full update-ness?
> >
> >Shouldn't really matter, the relevant changes were in the kernel.
> >
> >Kris
> >
> 
> When was this corrected? Is 6.2 going to be faster than 6.1?

As I said earlier, some of the most important changes that went into
6.0 were fixing performance problems in 5.x.  Since then it's been a
process of polishing and improving, instead of architectural changes.
So 6.2 is expected to be "better" than 6.1 but probably not measurably
faster for general workloads.

> Did the guys port the libthr changes into 6.2 or not?

Dunno what you mean here.

Kris


pgpep9g5bMpMU.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread John Smith

On 11/14/06, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:51:49PM -0800, Jeff Mohler wrote:
> Fair to say that those tools should be recompiled on a 6 system to
> ensure full update-ness?

Shouldn't really matter, the relevant changes were in the kernel.

Kris



When was this corrected? Is 6.2 going to be faster than 6.1?

Did the guys port the libthr changes into 6.2 or not?

Thank you,

-J
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 01:51:49PM -0800, Jeff Mohler wrote:
> Fair to say that those tools should be recompiled on a 6 system to
> ensure full update-ness?

Shouldn't really matter, the relevant changes were in the kernel.

Kris


pgptUG0zqiPwb.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread Jeff Mohler

Fair to say that those tools should be recompiled on a 6 system to
ensure full update-ness?

On 11/13/06, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 11:39:16AM -0800, Jim Pazarena wrote:
> When I switched to 6.0, then 6.1, it was noticed by most of my clients
> that my php/mysql/apache system slowed down a fair bit compared to previous
> version (5.XX).
>
> I always like to be on the bleeding edge of FreeBSD, but the performance
> hit is being commented about by my (few) mysql/php clients.
>
> I've seen the "trolls" of past about speed and previous versions, and I
> would really be interested to hear the actual truth about 6.XX speed.
> It is my understanding that 6.XX is more optimized for multi-processors,
> and that for a single processor, 5.XX (or even 4.XX) outperforms 6.XX.
>
> Would someone please outline the choices/drawbacks/concerns of even
> considering going back a series?

6.x is 5.x with performance bottlenecks fixed.  This applies both to
UP and SMP systems.  Therefore it's pretty surprising that you're
seeing a slowdown between 5.x and 6.x, so you should try to look into
exactly why your system seems to be running slower.  Perhaps it's just
a simple misconfiguration, or related to some other change you made at
the same time as you updated.

Kris




___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 11:39:16AM -0800, Jim Pazarena wrote:
> When I switched to 6.0, then 6.1, it was noticed by most of my clients
> that my php/mysql/apache system slowed down a fair bit compared to previous
> version (5.XX).
> 
> I always like to be on the bleeding edge of FreeBSD, but the performance
> hit is being commented about by my (few) mysql/php clients.
> 
> I've seen the "trolls" of past about speed and previous versions, and I
> would really be interested to hear the actual truth about 6.XX speed.
> It is my understanding that 6.XX is more optimized for multi-processors,
> and that for a single processor, 5.XX (or even 4.XX) outperforms 6.XX.
> 
> Would someone please outline the choices/drawbacks/concerns of even
> considering going back a series?

6.x is 5.x with performance bottlenecks fixed.  This applies both to
UP and SMP systems.  Therefore it's pretty surprising that you're
seeing a slowdown between 5.x and 6.x, so you should try to look into
exactly why your system seems to be running slower.  Perhaps it's just
a simple misconfiguration, or related to some other change you made at
the same time as you updated.

Kris


pgpMPF3bdJMoS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


v6 speed compared to previous versions

2006-11-13 Thread Jim Pazarena

When I switched to 6.0, then 6.1, it was noticed by most of my clients
that my php/mysql/apache system slowed down a fair bit compared to previous
version (5.XX).

I always like to be on the bleeding edge of FreeBSD, but the performance
hit is being commented about by my (few) mysql/php clients.

I've seen the "trolls" of past about speed and previous versions, and I
would really be interested to hear the actual truth about 6.XX speed.
It is my understanding that 6.XX is more optimized for multi-processors,
and that for a single processor, 5.XX (or even 4.XX) outperforms 6.XX.

Would someone please outline the choices/drawbacks/concerns of even
considering going back a series?

Thanks, Jim
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"