Ok, to be fair, I went back and looked at the nfs howto and my description of what the histogram means was a bit off. but my understanding it is sound. So I'll take a hit for not writing s l o w e r for my own good.
-C On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Corey Kovacs <corey.kov...@gmail.com>wrote: > It'd help if you read my posts before you presume I don't know what I am > talking about. I never said all threads were busy, only that the second > number tells you that's what happened. The big number in OP's post (third > number and first in the histogram) means exactly what we "both" have said, > that a client IO was waiting to be serviced. The delay could be caused by > anything in the way of doing IO. In my case for instance, I have lot's of > clients doing lots of IO so more threads clears the problem up. In his case > , it might that the IO to the disks is not fast enough or needs to be tuned. > > If the OP ever plans on having more than one client use this server, then > he will very likely want to bump the threads at some point, as well as tune > the backend in order to prevent unnecessary queueing. > > Done... > > > -C > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Joshua Baker-LePain <jl...@duke.edu>wrote: > >> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 at 8:38pm, Corey Kovacs wrote >> >> >> Well, I dind't miss, just didn't mention it. The big number is not the >>> 1-10% >>> of the threads being busy, it's how much time was spent waiting for a >>> thread >>> to free up to complete an I/O. You could interpret that as busy of >>> course, >>> but "why" it's busy is more important. >>> >> >> Sorry, but that's incorrect. From the NFS FAQ at < >> http://nfs.sourceforge.net/>: >> "Review the contents of /proc/net/rpc/nfsd, especially the line that >> begins with 'th'. The first number on that line is the total number of NFS >> server threads that are started and waiting for NFS requests. The second >> number indicates whether at any time all of the threads were running at >> once. The remaining numbers are a thread count time histogram." >> >> And from section 5.6 of the NFS HOWTO at <http://nfs.sourceforge.net/** >> nfs-howto/ar01s05.html<http://nfs.sourceforge.net/nfs-howto/ar01s05.html> >> >: >> >> "The last ten numbers on the th line in that file indicate the number of >> seconds that the thread usage was at that percentage of the maximum >> allowable. If you have a large number in the top three deciles, you may wish >> to increase the number of nfsd instances." >> >> So, again, the big number in the OP's "th" line was the number of seconds >> in the first decile of thread usage (i.e., not a big deal). And given the >> OP's second number (the one right after the thread count) was 0, at no point >> were all the threads busy. >> >> >> -- >> Joshua Baker-LePain >> QB3 Shared Cluster Sysadmin >> UCSF >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> rhelv5-list mailing list >> rhelv5-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/**mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list> >> > >
_______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list rhelv5-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
