Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 18:36:26 -0500 From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Implementing backpressure in the NFS server Message-ID: <21742.23674.220013.63261@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <54EE5AE9.1000908@freebsd.org> References: <21742.18390.976511.707403@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <54EE5AE9.1000908@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 18:29:45 -0500, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> said: > I think your other suggestions are fine, however the problem is that: > 1) they seem complex for an edge case > 2) turning them on may tank performance for no good reason if the > heuristic is met but we're not in the bad situation I'm OK with trading off performance for one user against availability for the other 800. I'm pleased to hear that FreeNAS was fine with 256 threads as the default; I'm going to try running with that to see if we encounter any other scaling issues as a result. (Our servers are all 12-core, 24-thread systems with buckets of memory, and I remember increasing the thread count as high as 128 previously, but I also remember having to back it down to 64 for some reason.) -GAWollman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21742.23674.220013.63261>