[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: LDAP load testing (Was: Re: slapd lightweight dispatcher)
- To: Rick Jones <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: LDAP load testing (Was: Re: slapd lightweight dispatcher)
- From: Howard Chu <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 20:09:36 -0700
- Cc: openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
- In-reply-to: <44861C10.email@example.com>
- References: <028ACA996891A1E1E5D2B91B@cadabra-sw.stanford.edu> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <44687BEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <44860A18.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <44861C10.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9a1) Gecko/20060602 SeaMonkey/1.5a
Rick Jones wrote:
Howard Chu wrote:
I guess my previous comment wasn't clear enough - I said a 32 bit server
would essentially max out at 1 million entries. Our tests were all on
pure 64 bit code, since we were aiming for 10 million entries to match
the results posted by Neil Wilson. Unfortunately we didn't have enough
RAM in our machines to fully duplicate those tests.
Rick Jones wrote:
Indeed, using something _considerably_ newer than RHEL 3 would be
goodness :) My guess about the memory usage would be that Linux on
Itanium is 64-bit only, so the compilation of the bits would be 64-bit.
Yes, that was the first thing I checked, but in fact sizeof(int)
still == 4 on this box.
sizeof(int) is 4 on all 64-bit platforms - unless they are ILP64.
Linux on Itanium is LP64 which means longs and pointers are 8 bytes.
I'm pretty sure that "all" 64-bit OSes with the exception of Windows
64 are LP64. Windows 64-bit is P64.
Without sufficient RAM, those tests all devolve to simply measuring the
speed of the disk subsystem, which really isn't what we're interested in.
Also, there are at least two "flavors" of rx1620 - the one that
comes with 1.3 GHz CPUs and the one that comes with 1.6 GHz CPUs.
The URL above doesn't seem to say which it was. The 1.6 GHz verison
has a faster FSB than the 1.3.
This machine has a pair of 1.6GHz CPUs; I don't recall at the moment
if they are 3MB cache or 6MB cache. We'll update the blog entry with
I don't think the rx1620 supports the 6MB cache 1.6 GHz CPUs.
http://www.hp.com/go/rx1620 would probably show what is supported.
Note - it's a 2620, not a 1620, and the spec page shows that 1.6 Ghz
CPUs are available in either 3 or 6MB cache configurations, all at the
same FSB speed.
Similarly, the T2000 comes (IIRC) in more than one flavor - they can
vary in frequency and number of cores.
This has the identical CPU as that used in Neil Wilson's test -
1.0GHz, 8 cores.
It would be very interesting to see if this benchmark gains anything
with 1.2 GHz cores. I'd be interested to hear more about how the
benchmark works - offline email may be best for that. I have a
amttering of "interesting" hardware at my disposal.
Agreed, we can take the rest of this offline.
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc
OpenLDAP Core Team http://www.openldap.org/project/