On Mar 7, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Maxim V. Patlasov wrote: > Brock, > >> If our IO servers are seeing extended periods of socknal_sd00 at >> 100% cpu, Would this cause a bottle neck? > Yes, I think so. > >> If so its a single homed hosts, would adding another interface to >> the host help? >> > Probably, no. It could only help in the case you have several CPUs > but something prevents ksocklnd to spread the load over them.
The servers are dual cpu systems. But I only see a single socknal_sd thread. > >> Is there threading anyplace? > Yes, ksocklnd spawns separate socknal_sd thread for each CPU/core > that you have. There are two algorithms of spreading the load - > you can play with enable_irq_affinity modparam flag. I see some things in logs about setting cpu affinity, Ill check out the manual some more, > >> Or is faster cpu the only way out? >> > I believe you either need faster CPU or faster system bus. If slow > system bus isn't your case, increasing number of CPUs also will do. Ok > > Sincerely, > Maxim > > _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
