On 2013-12-09 21:38, [email protected] wrote:
That is an interesting thought. I did check the aggregate CPU utilization (Dual 6-core 2.0GHz Xeon, E5-2630L) and overall it looks fine with a load average below 0.5 during transfers. However, I have not checked if there is a single thread that is blocking the process. I guess the cheap way to verify your assumption is to run the process on a faster processor. If the throughput goes up with the speed of the CPU that would indicate we're on the right track. I think we have a couple of E-2637v2's laying around, let me see if I can get those swapped in.
I think an even cheaper way would be to not use other cores for tasks - to see if the enforced single-threaded performance would be similar. For example, you can use "psrset" to define a vCPU-set (made of your other 11 cores) which would be yanked out of the default set and only leave one CPU for the OS. Also "psradm" can be used to set vCPU states such as "offline" so that the scheduler does not put processing threads on it, and (subject to hardware quirks) interrupts shouldn't come too. These tests can be done on-line without interrupting your system for hardware changes or reboots, and you can quickly model different situations regarding multi-processing (i.e. on systems with SPARC CMT or Intel HyperThreading you can create sets that would show performance differences of cores vs. threads/"strands" as parallel calculators). HTH, //Jim Klimov _______________________________________________ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
