From: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>,
Chris Worley <chris.worley@primarydata.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] sunrpc: reduce pool->sp_lock contention when queueing a xprt for servicing
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 06:12:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141126061222.2d375da1@tlielax.poochiereds.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141126024007.GB17634@fieldses.org>
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 21:40:07 -0500
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 07:38:18PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:09:41 -0500
> > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> > > I understand that's a lot of
> > > information.) But it's nice to see some numbers at least.
> > >
> > > (I wonder what the reason is for the odd shape in the 112-thread case
> > > (descending slightly as the writes decrease and then shooting up when
> > > they go to zero.) OK, I guess that's what you get if you just assume
> > > read-write contention is expensive and one write is slightly more
> > > expensive than one read. But then why doesn't it behave the same way in
> > > the 56-thread case?)
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, I wondered about that too.
>
> I was also forgetting that these are percentage increases.
>
> For the future something that gave just the before and after numbers
> side-by-side might be easier to think about?
>
Alas, that's what I can't release here. One of the perils of working at
a secretive startup. The part I can talk about is the fio job he was
using to test it:
"It was a fio 70/30 r/w random mix, where every thread was on a
separate file."
...and this about the server hardware:
"On the server side it was Dual 2.6GHz Ivy-bridge 8-core w/ hyper
threading enabled w/ 128GB RAM"
Unfortunately, I can't tell much about the underlying storage on the
server, other than that it's quite fast.
> > There is some virtualization in use on the clients here (and it's
> > vmware too), so I have to wonder if there's some variance in the
> > numbers due to weirdo virt behaviors or something.
> >
> > The good news is that the overall trend pretty clearly shows a
> > performance increase.
>
> Yep, sure.
>
> >
> > As always, benchmark results point out the need for more benchmarks.
> >
> > --
> > Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-26 11:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-21 19:19 [PATCH 0/4] sunrpc: reduce pool->sp_lock contention when queueing a xprt for servicing Jeff Layton
2014-11-21 19:19 ` [PATCH 1/4] sunrpc: add a rcu_head to svc_rqst and use kfree_rcu to free it Jeff Layton
2014-12-01 22:44 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-12-01 23:05 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-01 23:36 ` Trond Myklebust
2014-12-02 0:29 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-02 0:52 ` Trond Myklebust
2014-12-09 17:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-11-21 19:19 ` [PATCH 2/4] sunrpc: fix potential races in pool_stats collection Jeff Layton
2014-11-21 19:19 ` [PATCH 3/4] sunrpc: convert to lockless lookup of queued server threads Jeff Layton
2014-12-01 23:47 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-12-02 0:38 ` Trond Myklebust
2014-12-02 11:57 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-02 12:14 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-02 16:50 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-12-02 18:53 ` Ben Myers
2014-12-09 17:04 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-12-08 18:57 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-12-08 19:54 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-08 19:58 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-12-08 20:24 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-09 16:57 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-11-21 19:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] sunrpc: add some tracepoints around enqueue and dequeue of svc_xprt Jeff Layton
2014-12-02 13:31 ` Jeff Layton
2014-12-09 16:36 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-11-25 21:25 ` [PATCH 0/4] sunrpc: reduce pool->sp_lock contention when queueing a xprt for servicing Jeff Layton
2014-11-26 0:09 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-11-26 0:38 ` Jeff Layton
2014-11-26 2:40 ` J. Bruce Fields
2014-11-26 11:12 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2014-12-09 16:44 ` J. Bruce Fields
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141126061222.2d375da1@tlielax.poochiereds.net \
--to=jeff.layton@primarydata.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chris.worley@primarydata.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox