Greg Oster <os...@cs.usask.ca> wrote: > > sysctl to the rescue. > > The appropriate 'bit to twiddle' is likely raidPtr->openings. > Increasing the value can be done while holding raidPtr->mutex. > Decreasing the value can also be done while holding raidPtr->mutex, but > will need some care if attempting to decrease it by more than the > number of outstanding IOs.
This suggests that in my problem, RAIDframe would be the bottleneck given too many concurent I/O sent by WAPBL. But how is it possible? Aren't WAPBL flushes serialized? The change you sugest would be set by raidctl rather than sysctl, right? -- Emmanuel Dreyfus http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz m...@netbsd.org
