On Thu, 2016-06-30 at 20:01 -0600, Rich Megginson wrote:
> On 06/30/2016 07:52 PM, William Brown wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been thinking about this for a while, so I decided to dump my
>> thoughts to a document. I think I won't get to implementing this for a
>> while, but it would really help our server performance.
>>
>>
http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/logging-performance-improvement....
> Looks good. Can we quantify the current log overhead?
Sure, I could probably sit down and work out a way to bench mark
this .....
But without the alternative being written, hard to say. I could always
patch out logging and drop the lock in a hacked build so we can show
what "without logging contention" looks like?
That's only one part of it - you'd have to figure out some way to get
rid of the overhead of the formatting and flushing in the operation
threads too.
I suppose you could just write it and see what happens.