From: "Andrew Bell" <andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com>
To: chucklever@gmail.com
Cc: "Peter Staubach" <staubach@redhat.com>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Performance Diagnosis
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:34:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e80abd30807150934tc14e793ydd7aae44b4c3111b@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <76bd70e30807150923r31027edxb0394a220bbe879b-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Peter Staubach <staubach@redhat.com> wrote:
>> If it is the notion described above, sometimes called head
>> of line blocking, then we could think about ways to duplex
>> operations over multiple TCP connections, perhaps with one
>> connection for small, low latency operations, and another
>> connection for larger, higher latency operations.
>
> I've dreamed about that for years. I don't think it would be too
> difficult, but one thing that has held it back is the shortage of
> ephemeral ports on the client may reduce the number of concurrent
> mount points we can support.
Could one come up with a way to insert "small" ops somewhere in middle
of the existing queue, or are the TCP send buffers typically too deep
for this to do much good? Seems like more than one connection would
allow "good" servers to handle requests simultaneously anyway.
Is there really that big a shortage of ephemeral ports? I guess one
could do active connection management.
> One way to avoid the port issue is to construct an SCTP transport for
> NFS. SCTP allows multiple streams on the same connection, effectively
> eliminating head of line blocking.
Waiting for SCTP sounds like a long-term solution, as server vendors
probably have little incentive.
Thanks for the ideas. I'll have to see what kind of time I can get to
investigate this stuff.
--
Andrew Bell
andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-15 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-15 15:34 Performance Diagnosis Andrew Bell
[not found] ` <e80abd30807150834m47a1b86cle39885150f1d5bfd-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2008-07-15 15:49 ` Chuck Lever
2008-07-15 15:58 ` Peter Staubach
2008-07-15 16:23 ` Chuck Lever
[not found] ` <76bd70e30807150923r31027edxb0394a220bbe879b-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2008-07-15 16:34 ` Andrew Bell [this message]
[not found] ` <e80abd30807150934tc14e793ydd7aae44b4c3111b-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2008-07-15 17:20 ` Chuck Lever
2008-07-15 17:44 ` Peter Staubach
2008-07-15 18:17 ` Chuck Lever
[not found] ` <76bd70e30807151117g520f22cj1dfe26b971987d38-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2008-07-15 18:51 ` Trond Myklebust
2008-07-15 19:21 ` Peter Staubach
2008-07-15 19:35 ` Trond Myklebust
2008-07-15 19:55 ` Peter Staubach
2008-07-15 20:27 ` Trond Myklebust
2008-07-15 20:48 ` Peter Staubach
2008-07-15 21:15 ` Talpey, Thomas
2008-07-16 7:35 ` Benny Halevy
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=e80abd30807150934tc14e793ydd7aae44b4c3111b@mail.gmail.com \
--to=andrew.bell.ia@gmail.com \
--cc=chucklever@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=staubach@redhat.com \
/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