[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: fork performance
On 23/10/2012, at 10:26 AM, David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 07:41:51AM +1300, Lloyd Parkes wrote:
>> I have taken 30 second ktrace from cvs 1.12.13 that shows fork
>> taking a quarter of a second every time.
> Was that before it returned in the parent, or in the child?
This is in the parent.
> I've seen issues in the past (wasn't actually NetBSD) where the child
> was scheduled before the parent (dunno which NetBSD schedules first)
> and if the child didn't block the parent's priority slowly got lower
> and lower (if the system was busy).
My test system is a VirtualBox guest with two CPUs so scheduling shouldn't get
this pathological. The VirtualBox host has hyperthreading, so I can't guarantee
two real CPUs though.
>> This was after cvs had been running for about 12 hours on this task and it
>> didn't occur to me to get a copy of its memory map before I killed it.
> Did you even look at the size?
> Might have been growing a lot.
I checked swap and it wasn't being used. The system had enough RAM for the task
at hand and not much more. In fact I had to tune the vm sysctl stuff to avoid
swapping. The system now tries to keep much more anonymous memory in RAM and I
also reduced the target inactive percentage to 10% for no good reason just
before the horrendous CVS 1.12.13 test run.
Since this is VirtualBox guess, I can just fire it up again if anyone wants
Main Index |
Thread Index |