lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 4 Aug 2008 10:38:54 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <>
Cc:	Neil Brown <>, Michael Shuey <>,
	Shehjar Tikoo <>,,,,
Subject: Re: high latency NFS

On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 03:23:43PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 05:23:20PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Having implemented the second option on a different NUMA aware
> > OS and NFS server, I can say that it isn't that complex, nor that
> > hard to screw up.
> > 
> > 	1. spawn a new thread only if all NFSDs are busy and there
> > 	   are still requests queued to be serviced.
> > 	2. rate limit the speed at which you spawn new NFSD threads.
> > 	   About 5/s per node was about right.
> > 	3. define an idle time for each thread before they
> > 	   terminate. That is, is a thread has not been asked to
> > 	   do any work for 30s, exit.
> > 	4. use the NFSD thread pools to allow per-pool independence.
> Actually, I lost you on #4.  You mean that you apply 1-3 independently
> on each thread pool?  Or something else?

The former. i.e when you have a NUMA machine with a pool-per-node or
an SMP machine with a pool-per-cpu configuration, you can configure
the pools the differently according to the hardware config and
interrupt vectoring. This is especially useful if want to prevent
NFSDs from dominating the CPU taking disk interrupts or running user


Dave Chinner
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists