paul.jc@yahoo.com schrieb am 02.11.2020 um 20:07 in Nachricht
20201102190737.798.72820@hypatia.openldap.org:
Hi Quanah, Thanks for the input! I should mention that we load balance incoming queries so each of my consumers process a similar amount of requests yet my MDB consumers still have much higher CPU utilization.
Hi!
I wonder: Wouldn't it make more sense to compare the CPU "busy rates", meaning "user + sys + io_wait (+ some more)"? My guess is that MDB might use more user CPU as it uses less I/O, while HDB might use more I/O, thus less user CPU.
I'm experimenting with CPU usage graphs, and I'm attaching two examples: CPU-single shows usage in units of single CPUs, so 150% means one and a half CPU is being used, while CPU-total shows the ratio compared to all CPUs in the system, so 5% means your system could hadle that load "times 20".
Regards, Ulrich
Bind times are also higher (15ms - some spikes up to 55ms - on MDB consumer vs a steady 5ms on HDB consumers on average). My concern about the "scope not okay" log entries references an old thread regarding high numbers of aliases. For MDB, do you know if dereferencing (often with "always") with large numbers of aliases still causes slower search times (and in turn higher cpu utilization) as noted in this thread here:
https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/t hread/FHMQ7UAZZUPG3MEJK5PZCDVJXO4WDECE/#5RR35BAZXBVTIXCS7UZOTKORX65H7KFA
This thread can also be found here: https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201509/msg00111.html
I am not sure if this is related or if there was any resolution to that as it is several years old but figured I'd would throw it out there as a possible cause of my issue to see what you think. Let me know. Thanks!
Regards, Paul
