![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
| |||
| |||
|
|
Well, why not do this (as previously posted, but removing the database connection) : strace -o slow1.out -c -f dbaccess - slow1 where slow1 contains your 64 !echo "Hello World" Also, just try it on the actual machine rather than via ssh |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
The BIG problem are the 6.7MILLION failed calls to the OS close() system call! |
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
Art Kagel <art.kagel (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote: The BIG problem are the 6.7MILLION failed calls to the OS close() system call! they propably come from a post fork/clone loop that is clearing the file descriptors before a new shell is being called using execve (something like for (i=3; i<65536; i++) close(i)) each '!echo "something"' line produces extra 65536-3 failed (EBADF) 'close' calls 'close' on non-valid file desciptors can be easily benchmarked on both systems just to be sure that it is not a kernel issue also the strace can show what happens between execve and write(1,..) call (from "echo") on both systems (like scanning NFS directories that are on the PATH or LD_LIBRARY_PATH or something like that) |
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Bartlomiej Lidke" <ohggurnq (AT) rcs (DOT) cy.rot13.invalid> wrote in message news:hrsh37$v2i$1 (AT) news (DOT) onet.pl... Art Kagel <art.kagel (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote: The BIG problem are the 6.7MILLION failed calls to the OS close() system call! they propably come from a post fork/clone loop that is clearing the file descriptors before a new shell is being called using execve (something like for (i=3; i<65536; i++) close(i)) each '!echo "something"' line produces extra 65536-3 failed (EBADF) 'close' calls 'close' on non-valid file desciptors can be easily benchmarked on both systems just to be sure that it is not a kernel issue also the strace can show what happens between execve and write(1,..) call (from "echo") on both systems (like scanning NFS directories that are on the PATH or LD_LIBRARY_PATH or something like that) Art's reply is nowhere present on comp.databases.informix. I STILL think there's a problem with the feed .... Anyway, could somcseone else with RHEL 5.3 on AMD procs try it? Thanks!!!!: $ time dbaccess sysmaster < crap5.sql Database selected. Hello World Hello World Hello World ... Hello World Hello World Database closed. real 0m6.714s user 0m0.017s sys 0m0.041s $ cat crap5.sql !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" !echo "Hello World" _______________________________________________ Informix-list mailing list Informix-list (AT) iiug (DOT) org http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list |
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
IDS 11.5FC6 on RHEL 5.3 Here's a starange one. When running SQL which interacts with OS to output messages, it's very, very much slower at a new customer site than it is at our own or others. The difference seems to be the AMD processors the customer has (we have Intel) - the OS and IDS versions are identical. |
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Neil Truby" <neil.tr... (AT) ardenta (DOT) com> wrote in message news:82pgrnFo58U1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net... IDS 11.5FC6 on RHEL 5.3 Here's a starange one. *When running SQL which interacts with OS to output messages, it's very, very much slower at a new customer site than it isat our own or others. *The difference seems to be the AMD processors the customer has (we have Intel) - the OS and IDS versions are identical. This turns out to have been caused by an RHEL kernel parameter setting being made too tight. Thanks to Uwe Weber from IBM, and several from c.d.i. but in particular Art Kagel, for their help in getting to the solution. |
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Neil Truby" <neil.tr... (AT) ardenta (DOT) com> wrote in message news:82pgrnFo58U1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net... IDS 11.5FC6 on RHEL 5.3 Here's a starange one. When running SQL which interacts with OS to output messages, it's very, very much slower at a new customer site than it is at our own or others. The difference seems to be the AMD processors the customer has (we have Intel) - the OS and IDS versions are identical. This turns out to have been caused by an RHEL kernel parameter setting being made too tight. Thanks to Uwe Weber from IBM, and several from c.d.i. but in particular Art Kagel, for their help in getting to the solution. Which kernel setting? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |