On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:29:11 +0200 Alexander Motin <m...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 09.01.2014 18:18, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > Depends if you're thinking locally or globally. > > > > Locally - for nfs? not a big deal. > > > > Globally - NFS, ZFS, GELI, geom/cam, NIC, etc.. suddenly your > > machine could default to having a couple thousand worker threads > > just for a HBA and a 10GE NIC. That's a little nuts. > > So, what is your point? Each NFS thread (unlike GEOM or CAM) executes > only _one_ request at a time. Would you like your > 128-core/many-spindle system executed only 4 synchronous requests at > a time? > I certainly do not want to have 8 * ncpu threads hanging around. While said extra CPUs were all but forced on me by Intel innovators, my NFS workloads hardly did scale at the same pace over the same time period. -- Alexander Kabaev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
