From: "Iozone" Subject: Re: Re: An interesting performance thing ? Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:41:19 -0600 Message-ID: <031801c60196$60a70ac0$1500000a@americas.hpqcorp.net> References: <00b901c600db$5d374960$1500000a@americas.hpqcorp.net> <17312.39940.985507.704832@cse.unsw.edu.au> <43A0A0D5.4040804@citi.umich.edu> <018401c60108$c9477f30$1500000a@americas.hpqcorp.net> <17312.45710.867019.969182@cse.unsw.edu.au> <20051215023256.GA22951@fieldses.org> <020a01c60133$3d8fc530$1500000a@americas.hpqcorp.net> <20051215144901.GD14973@fieldses.org> <02f001c6018d$56b31030$1500000a@americas.hpqcorp.net> <20051215161431.GA21043@fieldses.org> Reply-To: "Iozone" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Cc: "Neil Brown" , , , Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1EmwCE-0003yZ-SO for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 08:43:10 -0800 Received: from vms040pub.verizon.net ([206.46.252.40]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1EmwCD-0005rz-PA for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 08:43:11 -0800 Received: from cappsnc ([71.96.135.143]) by vms040.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.02 (built Sep 9 2005)) with ESMTPA id <0IRJ002JIT0V4XA0@vms040.mailsrvcs.net> for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 15 Dec 2005 10:41:21 -0600 (CST) To: "J. Bruce Fields" Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: "Iozone" Cc: "Neil Brown" ; ; ; Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 10:14 AM Subject: Re: [NFS] Re: An interesting performance thing ? > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 09:36:37AM -0600, Iozone wrote: >> With IP_HASHBITS = 8, there were 256 queues, >> but only one was active. If the hash distribution were >> uniform, then the queue depth could have been 1 (one) >> but instead is a linear search of a relatively large number >> of items. >> >> Does that help ? > > I'm mainly curious how much effort it's worth expending on optimizing > that hash. If it turns out that even the current linear search isn't > that expensive, then that's an argument against doing any more > optimizing (beyond just fixing the current obvious problem). > > So maybe playing with oprofile or something would help answer my > question. > > --b. > Bruce, I'm still working on trying to track down the patch to fix RedHat EL 4 (2.6.9-11) so that it will not panic. Until I get that patch located and installed, the profiling may not be very successful :-( It's a good idea, I'm just not able to grant your wish at this point in time. Please try your wish again later :-) ( EAGAIN ? :-) Enjoy, Don Capps ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs