Return-Path: Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:56920 "EHLO rcsinet10.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751576Ab1DGOgq convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:36:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Prioritizing readdirplus/getattr/lookup Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Chuck Lever In-Reply-To: <642211.9524.qm@web65416.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:36:34 -0400 Cc: Benny Halevy , Jim Rees , Garth Gibson , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Message-Id: References: <642211.9524.qm@web65416.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> To: Andrew Klaassen Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Apr 7, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Andrew Klaassen wrote: > --- On Thu, 4/7/11, Chuck Lever wrote: > >> On Apr 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, Andrew Klaassen wrote: >> >>> I have, for now, hacked my way around my problem by >>> splitting the server's uplink into two separate bonds. >>> This seems to have moderated the transaction rate of the HPC >>> farm and allowed the "ls -l" calls to be served at an >>> acceptable rate. >> >> Have you created enough nfsd threads on your Linux NFS >> servers? > > That was one of the things I varied as part of my testing; almost every power of 2 from 8 threads up to 1024 threads. It actually made things slightly worse, not better, but I can certainly give it a try again. Is the server an SMP system? Do you see high CPU load during times of slow performance? -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com