[389-users] Re: 2.x query performance problem

Hello Thierry,

 

I can confirm index on 'uniqueMember' for both versions. I also tried to recreate and reindex 'uniqueMember', same result.

SRCH-records are inconspicuous, except high optime (no notes..)

 

What exactly do you want to see in pstacks. Do you mean the output from pstack-tool?

 

regards

Claas

Gesendet: Dienstag, 07. März 2023 um 15:38 Uhr
Von: "Thierry Bordaz" <tbordaz@redhat.com>
An: 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Betreff: [389-users] Re: 2.x query performance problem

Hi Claas,

I do not recall a specific change 1.4.4 vs 2.0 that could explain this.

Do you confirm that 'uniqueMember' is indexed in equality on both ? What are the SRCH records in the access logs (notes=A ?).
On 2.0, it lasts 2sec, you may try to capture few pstacks that would give some tips.

regards
thierry

On 3/7/23 14:54, Claas Vieler wrote:

Hello,

 

we have a search performance problem when we migrated from 1.4.4.19 to 2.0.17.

 

Our environment has about 100k entries, about 15k users and about 10k groups. Also big groups with thousand of users, also users with thousand of group membership. So I would call it a small instance

 

On 1.4.x query perfomance ist fine:
ldapsearch for "(uniqueMember=cn=sampleuser,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com) dn " via LDAPI on 1.4.x takes approx 0,01-0,03 sec.
This user is member of approx. 500 groups.

 

I tested two migration methods:
1. via replication
After initializing replica, the same query takes about _8_ sec.
So I reindexed db (dsctl .. db2index) and get durations for the query from 2-3 sec.

 

2. via ldif export/import
after importing, the same query takes about 2-3 sec

 

But even with 2-3 sec, we talk about 2.x perfomance ten time slower than 1.4.x.

Is this a know issue? I compared all cache-settings and found no differences.
I have no more ideas how to optimize this. Should we wait for 2.x when its adopted to new lmdb?

 

thanks

Claas

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________  389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org  To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org  Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/  List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines  List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org  Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue  

_______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue