Re: performance of jailed processes

Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Can anyone explain why jailed processes seem to perform much worse
> than non-jailed processes in recent -CURRENT?
> 
> Specifically, running a query against a remote MySQL server from
> inside a jail takes an order of magnitude more time than from outside
> the jail.  Tcpdump shows that the TCP packets carrying the result are
> evenly spaced, so this is not a matter of the server timing out on a
> DNS lookup or anything like that.
> 
> Running a configure script also takes much longer inside the jail than
> outisde, and again, progress is even (though slow), so it is clearly
> not a matter of DNS timing out.
> 
> There is no NFS or NIS in the equation either.  Parts of the file
> space inside the jail is a nullfs mount, but we've also tried without
> nullfs.
> 
> The system currently uses SCHED_ULE, but we had similar trouble with
> SCHED_4BSD on 5.1-RELEASE before we went -CURRENT.
> 
> The machine currently has ~2600 processes running in ~400 jails.  Is
> it conceivable that be scalability issues, perhaps in the credentials
> code, could cause vastly increased syscall overhead for jailed

that suggests 400 addresses, which suggests that lots of linked lists are being 
traversed  for received packets..

> processes?
> 
> DES


-- 
+------------------------------------+       ______ _  __
|   __--_|\  Julian Elischer         |       \     U \/ / hard at work in
|  /       \ julian_at_elischer.org     +------>x   USA    \ a very strange
| (   OZ    )                                \___   ___ | country !
+- X_.---._/    presently in San Francisco       \_/   \\
           v