Performance Problems.. Server hardware smoked by $500 box?
John Straiton
jsmailing at clickcom.com
Fri Sep 12 07:35:38 PDT 2003
> Can you run a simple, processor/memory-intensive test
> on the development machine and the Dell box?
I ran ubench on both. Here's what the man page for it says:
Ubench is executing rather senseless mathematical integer and
floating-
point calculations for 3 mins concurrently using several
processes, and
the result is Ubench CPU benchmark. The ratio of floating-point
calcu-
lations to integer is about 1:3. Ubench will spawn about 2
concurrent
processes for each CPU available on the system. This ensures all
avail-
able raw CPU horsepower is used.
Ubench is executing rather senseless memory allocation and
memory to
memory copying operations for another 3 mins concurrently using
several
processes, and the result is Ubench MEM benchmark.
Does that sound mean enough? I saw your function below but I know not
the ways of C.
> Can you do a raw test of performance on the NFS
> mounts from the two systems? (Do they use the same
> read size? Do they have the same readahead setting?)
Both are mounted via /etc/fstab with default options as seen below (this
is our php sessions mount):
209.198.22.23:/var/sessions /sessions-on-db nfs rw 0 0
> Are you using UDP mounts on both machines?
Unless that's the default, no. I'd probably be of the opinion that since
the mounts are all 2-way, that possible data loss from dropped UDP
packets would be unacceptable.
> Under load, what does the CPU line on systat -vmstat
> look like on the two machines?
I ran a test on both machines by running an abusing apache benchmark on
them and then taking a snapshot of the report after 800+ requests had
completed. This virtually brought the production machine to a halt while
the development one kept putzin' along just fine. I don't know how to
interpret the results tho as I've never seen this test before.
During the height of an "ab -c 100 -n 1000" test against the machine,
systat -vmstat reported this on the production webserver (sorry it's
gonna be ugly)
2 users Load 37.46 29.30 15.58 Sep 12 10:32
Mem:KB REAL VIRTUAL VN PAGER SWAP
PAGER
Tot Share Tot Share Free in out in
out
Act 282112 9508 719504 15852 747888 count
All 532264 16048 817988 27688 pages
1538 zfod
Interrupts
Proc:r p d s w Csw Trp Sys Int Sof Flt 138 cow 489
total
88 33 1470 1792 4087 905 141 1691 106688 wire
stray 0
275748 act
stray 1
26.4%Sys 4.2%Intr 69.4%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idl 145200 inact
stray 6
| | | | | | | | | | cache
npx0 13
=============++>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 747888 free 1
fxp0 11
daefr 260
fxp1 10
Namei Name-cache Dir-cache 247 prcfr
ata0 14
Calls hits % hits % react
ahc0 5
13160 13103 100 pdwak
ahc1 3
pdpgs
atkbd0 1
Disks da0 acd0 fd0 pass0 pass1 intrn 100
clk 0
KB/t 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 114880 buf 128
rtc 8
tps 0 0 0 0 0 187 dirtybuf
MB/s 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86201 desiredvnodes
% busy 0 0 0 0 0 21550 numvnodes
12593 freevnodes
Doing the same thing against the development server gave this:
1 users Load 23.00 8.48 3.50 Sep 12 10:26
Mem:KB REAL VIRTUAL VN PAGER SWAP
PAGER
Tot Share Tot Share Free in out in
out
Act 330304 5192 580316 11540 48904 count
All 985244 9320 1510820 19436 pages
Interrupts
Proc:r p d s w Csw Trp Sys Int Sof Flt 22 cow 1704
total
6 128 5748 726 2700 222 456 136576 wire
stray 0
336964 act
stray 6
10.9%Sys 6.2%Intr 82.9%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idl 468416 inact
stray 7
| | | | | | | | | | 42536 cache
npx0 13
=====++++>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6368 free 1464
xl0 11
daefr
rl0 12
Namei Name-cache Dir-cache prcfr 12
ata0 14
Calls hits % hits % react
fdc0 6
15104 15040 100 pdwak 100
clk 0
428 zfod pdpgs 128
rtc 8
Disks ad0 224 ofod intrn
KB/t 16.00 52 %slo-z 110928 buf
tps 12 84 tfree 192 dirtybuf
MB/s 0.18 68139 desiredvnodes
% busy 0 37187 numvnodes
5864 freevnodes
John Straiton jks@ clickcom.com Clickcom, Inc 704-365-9970x101
More information about the freebsd-performance
mailing list