Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 25 Aug 2015 07:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
To:        Gerrit =?utf-8?B?S8O8aG4=?= <gerrit.kuehn@aei.mpg.de>
Cc:        Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>, stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate
Message-ID:  <202540715.30987815.1440503749374.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20150825095448.53458554a4ee7f96129a2d70@aei.mpg.de>
References:  <20150824192926.GL3158@zxy.spb.ru> <20150825095448.53458554a4ee7f96129a2d70@aei.mpg.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gerritt Kuhn wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:29:26 +0300 Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
> wrote about dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate:
> 
> SO> Last -stable, no tuning. Is this normal?
> 
> From 10.2-rel (and still having severe performance issues with NFS as
> reported before):
> 
> dev.ix.0.queue7.interrupt_rate: 31250
> dev.ix.0.queue6.interrupt_rate: 100000
> dev.ix.0.queue5.interrupt_rate: 83333
> dev.ix.0.queue4.interrupt_rate: 100000
> dev.ix.0.queue3.interrupt_rate: 500000
> dev.ix.0.queue2.interrupt_rate: 31250
> dev.ix.0.queue1.interrupt_rate: 31250
> dev.ix.0.queue0.interrupt_rate: 500000
> 
If you have tso enabled, you could try this patch:
  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3477

If TSO is disabled, then we don't have an explanation for poor NFS performance
yet. If you haven't seen it, you might want to keep an eye on this thread:
  http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55DC1B5A.8010109

rick

> 
> 
> cu
>   Gerrit
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
> 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202540715.30987815.1440503749374.JavaMail.zimbra>