2013-01-08 22:48 keltezéssel, Shaun Thomas írta:
On 01/08/2013 02:05 PM, AJ Weber wrote:
Is there an "easy" way to tell what scheduler my OS is using?
Unfortunately not. I looked again, and it seems that CFS was merged into 2.6.23.
Anything before that is probably safe, but the vendor may ha
On 01/10/2013 02:51 AM, Henri Philipps wrote:
http://research.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Publications/meehean-thesis11.pdf
Wow, that was pretty interesting. It looks like for servers, the O(1)
scheduler is much better even with the assignment bug he identified, and
BFS responds better to varying load
Hi,
we also hit this performance barrier a while ago, when migrating a
database on a big server (48 core Opteron, 512GB RAM) from Kernel
2.6.32 to 3.2 (both kernels from Debian packages). The system load was
getting very high, as you also observed (don't know the exact numbers
right now).
After s
On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 03:48:38 PM Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 01/08/2013 02:05 PM, AJ Weber wrote:
> > Is there an "easy" way to tell what scheduler my OS is using?
>
> Unfortunately not. I looked again, and it seems that CFS was merged into
> 2.6.23. Anything before that is probably safe, but
On 01/08/2013 02:05 PM, AJ Weber wrote:
Is there an "easy" way to tell what scheduler my OS is using?
Unfortunately not. I looked again, and it seems that CFS was merged into
2.6.23. Anything before that is probably safe, but the vendor may have
backported it. If you don't see the settings I
When I checked these, both of these settings exist on my CentOS 6.x host
(2.6.32-279.5.1.el6.x86_64).
However, the autogroup_enabled was already set to 0. (The
migration_cost was set to the 0.5ms, default noted in the OP.) So I
don't know if this is strictly limited to kernel 3.0.
Is there
On 01/08/2013 01:04 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Assembly language on the brain. of course I meant NOOP.
Ok, in that case, these are completely separate things. For IO
scheduling, there's the Completely Fair Queue (CFQ), NOOP, Deadline, and
so on.
For process scheduling, at least recently, th
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 01/08/2013 12:31 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> What's the comparison of these settings versus say going to the NOP
>> scheduler?
>
>
> Assuming you actually meant NOP and not the NOOP I/O scheduler, I don't
> know. These CPU scheduler tweak
On 01/08/2013 12:31 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
What's the comparison of these settings versus say going to the NOP
scheduler?
Assuming you actually meant NOP and not the NOOP I/O scheduler, I don't
know. These CPU scheduler tweaks are all I could dig up, and googling
for NOP by itself or combi
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> On 01/08/2013 12:25 PM, Midge Brown wrote:
>
>> The kernel on our Linux system doesn't appear to have these two
>> settings according to the list provided by sysctl -a. Please pardon
>> my ignorance, but should I add them?
>
>
> Sorry if I was
On 01/08/2013 12:25 PM, Midge Brown wrote:
The kernel on our Linux system doesn't appear to have these two
settings according to the list provided by sysctl -a. Please pardon
my ignorance, but should I add them?
Sorry if I wasn't more clear. These only apply to Linux systems with the
Complete
hanks,
Midge
- Original Message -
From: Shaun Thomas
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:46 PM
Subject: [PERFORM] Two Necessary Kernel Tweaks for Linux Systems
Hey everyone!
After much testing and hair-pulling, we've confirmed
On 01/08/2013 09:29 AM, Andrea Suisani wrote:
On 01/02/2013 10:46 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey everyone!
After much testing and hair-pulling, we've confirmed two kernel settings that
> should always be modified in production Linux systems. Especially new ones
with
the completely fair schedul
On 01/02/2013 10:46 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey everyone!
After much testing and hair-pulling, we've confirmed two kernel settings that
> should always be modified in production Linux systems. Especially new ones
with
the completely fair scheduler (CFS) as opposed to the O(1) scheduler.
[cu
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> Hey everyone!
>
> After much testing and hair-pulling, we've confirmed two kernel settings
> that should always be modified in production Linux systems. Especially new
> ones with the completely fair scheduler (CFS) as opposed to the O(1)
> sch
Dear Shaun,
Thanks for that - it's really interesting to know.
On 02/01/13 21:46, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey everyone!
After much testing and hair-pulling, we've confirmed two kernel
settings that should always be modified in production Linux systems.
Especially new ones with the completely fair
Hey everyone!
After much testing and hair-pulling, we've confirmed two kernel settings
that should always be modified in production Linux systems. Especially
new ones with the completely fair scheduler (CFS) as opposed to the O(1)
scheduler.
If you want to follow along, these are:
/proc/sys
17 matches
Mail list logo
