Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:28:49 -0600 From: Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Subject: Re: NFS and SAMBA on RELENG_5 vs RELENG_4 Message-ID: <41F41711.4020907@centtech.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050123210740.46157Y-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050123210740.46157Y-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: > On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, Eric Anderson wrote: > > >>I can tell you this - you must increase the number of nfsd threads to a >>high number, if you plan on really hammering the machine with nfs and >>lots of clients. I recompiled the nfsd binary with it tweaked to allow >>256 threads, and that still isn't quite enough. You need something on >>the order of: 1 per active machine using nfs * 1.10. The hard part is >>finding out how many active machines you have. I usually start with >>about 20% of my total machines mounted to the server, and then watch the >>nfsd threads cpu time. If the lowest thread is using more than about >>3-4% of the time of the 10-15th top nfsd process, then you need to bump >>up the number. That may be confusing.. > > > Hmm. So it sounds like it would make sense for us to do that in the src > tree. Is it sufficient to simply redefine MAXNFSDCNT from 20 to 256, or > do other things also need tweaking? I think it would make sense. Yes, that is the only knob to turn.. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology I have seen the future and it is just like the present, only longer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41F41711.4020907>