Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 13 Sep 2013 20:20:08 -0700
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Cc:        "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@yandex-team.ru>, Luigi Rizzo <luigi@freebsd.org>, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, George Neville-Neil <gnn@neville-neil.com>, FreeBSD Net <net@freebsd.org>, "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@freebsd.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Network stack changes
Message-ID:  <CAJ-VmonWMzwNOyBJKyRMiF0_PUAtTd%2BJ4tx33Fnp0m3ModgCzA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <221093226.23439826.1379112203059.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
References:  <6BDA4619-783C-433E-9819-A7EAA0BD3299@neville-neil.com> <221093226.23439826.1379112203059.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 13 September 2013 15:43, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote:


> And any time you increase latency, that will have a negative impact on
> NFS performance. NFS RPCs are usually small messages (except Write requests
> and Read replies) and the RTT for these (mostly small, bidirectional)
> messages can have a significant impact on NFS perf.
>

Hi,

the penalties to go to main memory quite a few times each time we process a
frame is expensive. If we can get some better behaviour through batching
leading to more efficient cache usage, it may not actually _have_ a delay.

But, that requires a whole lot of design stars to align. And I'm still knee
deep elsewhere, so I haven't really finished getting up to speed with what
everyone else has done / said about it..



-adrian



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonWMzwNOyBJKyRMiF0_PUAtTd%2BJ4tx33Fnp0m3ModgCzA>