Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 21:27:31 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: harvest_interrupt=YES slows down machine Message-ID: <200103071926.f27JQbR60731@gratis.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: <200103071909.f27J9tp71792@earth.backplane.com> ; from Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> "Wed, 07 Mar 2001 11:09:55 PST." References: <200103071909.f27J9tp71792@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 1) Reduce the ring size to something reasonable. 1024 is massive > overkill. 32 would be just fine. I'll play with this. > 2) Add a mandatory tsleep in random_kthread() for EACH entry scanned > from the harvest ring. Something reasonable like 1/10 second (similar > to what you do if the harvest ring is empty. Or may you could pull > off 5 entries at a time and then sleep. Right now you run it in a > tight loop until the ring is completely empty. Hmm. Sounds doable. I'll play. > A 1/10 second sleep and a ring limit of 32 still gives you an effective > 320 seeds per second. Still overkill, but at least not the massive > overkill that its doing now. Event != seed. I'll juggle numbers and see if I can come up with any tweakables (sysctl's) that could give users more control here. Thanks! M -- Mark Murray Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200103071926.f27JQbR60731>