On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 1:07 AM, MORITA Kazutaka <[email protected]> wrote: > At Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:35:35 +0900, > Hitoshi Mitake wrote: >> >> Current dog issues request for gathering VDI information in a >> sequential manner (parse_vdi()). This way is not scalable when a >> number of VDIs becomes larger. >> >> This patch parallelize parse_vdi() with work queue. Some dog >> commands which call parse_vdi() can enjoy performance improvement. >> >> The below is an sample of dog vdi list. The test is done on 16 >> nodes cluster which has 3000 VDIs. >> >> Before: >> $ time sh -c "dog/dog vdi list -a 10.68.13.1 > /dev/null" >> sh -c "dog/dog vdi list -a 10.68.13.1 > /dev/null" 8.81s user 0.24s system >> 70% cpu 12.876 total >> >> After: >> % time sh -c "dog/dog vdi list -a 10.68.13.1 > /dev/null" >> sh -c "dog/dog vdi list -a 10.68.13.1 > /dev/null" 14.35s user 2.02s system >> 209% cpu 7.816 total > > user time + system time > total time > > Is this really correct?
Yes. Because these values express consumed time, not passed time. Thanks, Hitoshi -- sheepdog mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/sheepdog
