On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 03:15:59PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 05:23:20PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 05:03:05PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > > > You might want to track the max length of the request queue too and > > > start more threads if the queue is long, to allow a quick ramp-up. > > > > Right, but even request queue depth is not a good indicator. You > > need to leep track of how many NFSDs are actually doing useful > > work. That is, if you've got an NFSD on the CPU that is hitting > > the cache and not blocking, you don't need more NFSDs to handle > > that load because they can't do any more work than the NFSD > > that is currently running is. > > > > i.e. take the solution that Greg banks used for the CPU scheduler > > overload issue (limiting the number of nfsds woken but not yet on > > the CPU), > > I don't remember that, or wasn't watching when it happened.... Do you > have a pointer? Ah, I thought that had been sent to mainline because it was mentioned in his LCA talk at the start of the year. Slides 65-67 here: http://mirror.linux.org.au/pub/linux.conf.au/2007/video/talks/41.pdf Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
