From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753563AbXLLRqX (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:46:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751638AbXLLRqP (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:46:15 -0500 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:36187 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751669AbXLLRqP (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:46:15 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:46:13 -0500 To: Daniel Phillips Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A peek at the future of storage Message-ID: <20071212174613.GA16656@fieldses.org> References: <200712120846.18320.phillips@phunq.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200712120846.18320.phillips@phunq.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) From: "J. Bruce Fields" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 08:46:18AM -0800, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Incidentally, we ran our tests with 128 knfsd threads. The default of 8 > threads produces miserable performance on the SSD, which gave us a good > scare on our initial test run. It would be very nice to implement an > algorithm to scale the knfsd thread pool automatically, in order to > eliminate this class of thing that can go wrong. If somebody became > inspired to take on that little project that would be great, otherwise > it is in our pipeline for, hmm, Christmas delivery. (Exactly which > Christmas is left unspecified.) People have proposed writing a daemon that just reads /proc/net/rpc/nfsd periodically and uses that to adjust the number of threads from userspace, probably subject to some limits in a config file someplace. (Think that could do the job, or is there some reason this would be easier in the kernel?) --b.