Josh Berkus wrote:
> Tom,
>
>
>>The bigger problem here is that the SMP locking bottlenecks we are
>>currently seeing are *hardware* issues (AFAICT anyway). The only way
>>that futexes can offer a performance win is if they have a smarter way
>>of executing the basic atomic-test-and-set sequence than we do;
>>and if so, we could read their code and adopt that method without having
>>to buy into any large reorganization of our code.
>
>
> Well, initial results from Gavin/Neil's patch seem to indicate that, while
> futexes do not cure the CSStorm bug, they do lessen its effects in terms of
> real performance loss.
I proposed weeks ago to see how the CSStorm is affected by stick each backend
in one processor ( where the process was born ) using the cpu-affinity capability
( kernel 2.6 ), is this proposal completely out of mind ?
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
