[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: (ITS#3835) Lightweight Listener Thread

--On Monday, July 11, 2005 7:52 PM -0400 Sang s Lim <slim@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>> I've tested now with the new build, and it works correctly.  So I'm
>> guessing the ifdef's are not even needed, since things must always be
>> mutexed.
>> As for the results:
>> Search rate with patch: 868.232 ops/second
>> Searchrate without patch:  910.171 ops/second
>> I.e., its faster without the patch for me on Solaris.  I've not yet
> tested
>> with it being compiled with the second flag set.
> To find the cause of the performance degradation, I have thoroughly
> reanalyze the patch and found there is an expensive operation,
> WAKE_LISTENER in "slapd_resume". So I eliminated the operation in the
> patch.
> The following patch has been tested and showed no performance degradation
> in my environment as before.
> ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/sangseok-050711.diff
> Sang-Seok

Hi Sang-Seok,

I'll give this new version a try. :)


Quanah Gibson-Mount
Product Engineer
Symas Corporation
Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: