This is a discussion on Re: [Samba] performance regression between 30.14a and 3.0.20 - Samba ; I am unfamiliar with cachegrind but I assume this is just a profiler. Do you have to compile instrumentation into smbd? Have fun in Boston, great city. Greg On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 09:17 -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Fri, ...
I am unfamiliar with cachegrind but I assume this is just a profiler. Do
you have to compile instrumentation into smbd?
Have fun in Boston, great city.
On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 09:17 -0800, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 09:49:02AM -0500, Greg Dickie wrote:
> > Yes, it is the win32 version, but its an old one (1998), not sure how
> > the config file will carry to a more recent version.
> > IOmeter Access specifications:
> > Transfer req. size = 64Kb & 8Kb
> > Percent of Access Specification = 100%
> > Type of Operation: 100% read; 100% write; 50% read
> > Percent Random/Sequential Distribution: 100% sequential
> > Queue Depth = 8
> > Reply Size: No Reply
> > Burst Length = 25 I/Os
> > Align I/Os on: 64Kb & 8Kb
> > Ramp up Time = 30sec
> > Run Time = 3 min
> > # of clients used: 1 to 9 clients (Linear Stepping)
> > Note that the problem is visible with only one client.
> > The clients are GbE as is the server, not sure if you will see a
> > difference on 100BT.
> > Thank you very much for looking at this, please let me know if there is
> > anything I can do to help.
> No problem. What I'll do is run the version against a smbd
> running with cachegrind. That will point out any extra CPU
> usage we're accumulating between the two versions. If we've
> regressed because of a code path this will tell us.
> Might take a while though as I have to be at LinuxWorld
> Boston next week.
just a guy
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the