resend On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Haomai Wang <haomaiwang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > COOL > > Interesting that async messenger will consume more memory than simple, in my > mind I always think async should use less memory. I will give a look at this > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Mark Nelson <mnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Guy, >> >> Given all of the recent data on how different memory allocator >> configurations improve SimpleMessenger performance (and the effect of memory >> allocators and transparent hugepages on RSS memory usage), I thought I'd run >> some tests looking how AsyncMessenger does in comparison. We spoke about >> these a bit at the last performance meeting but here's the full write up. >> The rough conclusion as of right now appears to be: >> >> 1) AsyncMessenger performance is not dependent on the memory allocator >> like with SimpleMessenger. >> >> 2) AsyncMessenger is faster than SimpleMessenger with TCMalloc + 32MB (ie >> default) thread cache. >> >> 3) AsyncMessenger is consistently faster than SimpleMessenger for 128K >> random reads. >> >> 4) AsyncMessenger is sometimes slower than SimpleMessenger when memory >> allocator optimizations are used. >> >> 5) AsyncMessenger currently uses far more RSS memory than SimpleMessenger. >> >> Here's a link to the paper: >> >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gTBZrkrnpZS1Q4VktjZkhrNHc/view >> >> Mark >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > > > > > -- > > Best Regards, > > Wheat -- Best Regards, Wheat _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |