From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 2 18:07:37 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1460916A41F for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:07:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk) Received: from mail-gw0.york.ac.uk (mail-gw0.york.ac.uk [144.32.128.245]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B3843D45 for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:07:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk) Received: from buffy.york.ac.uk (buffy-128.york.ac.uk [144.32.128.160]) by mail-gw0.york.ac.uk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jA2I7N6a012945; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:07:23 GMT Received: from buffy.york.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by buffy.york.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jA2I7MrU052751; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:07:22 GMT (envelope-from gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk) Received: (from ga9@localhost) by buffy.york.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id jA2I7MrT052750; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:07:22 GMT (envelope-from gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk) X-Authentication-Warning: buffy.york.ac.uk: ga9 set sender to gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk using -f From: Gavin Atkinson To: Martin Hudec In-Reply-To: <20051102154552.GE32554@pleiades.aeternal.net> References: <1130943516.51544.34.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> <20051102152322.GF93549@cicely12.cicely.de> <1130945849.51544.42.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> <20051102154552.GE32554@pleiades.aeternal.net> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 18:07:21 +0000 Message-Id: <1130954841.51544.57.camel@buffy.york.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port X-York-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-York-MailScanner-From: gavin.atkinson@ury.york.ac.uk Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Poor NFS server performance in 6.0 with SMP and mpsafenet=1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 18:07:37 -0000 On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 16:45 +0100, Martin Hudec wrote: > Hello, > > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:37:29PM +0000 or thereabouts, Gavin Atkinson wrote: > > When I get home, I'll have a play with both ULE and POLLING to see what > > difference they make, however ideally I'd like to not use polling in > > production if possible. > > What's wrong with polling on production in your current environment if > I may ask? Certainly. For heavily loaded machines, polling seems to significantly improve performance, but in my experience on lightly loaded machines it seems to increase latency on response to packets. For the particular workloads it will be used for, (serving web content and databases), the latency can be noticeable. IMHO, polling is great for lower-spec boxes or highly loaded machines, but can hinder performance when the machine is lightly loaded. I have a few machines which run with polling on, and for those usage patterns it really helps. I just don't believe this is one of those cases. Gavin