On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 03:17:53PM -0500, Andy Liebman wrote: > >> Samba will use all the cores you can give it - so long as >> you have at least more clients than cores. >> >> Jeremy. >> > While I have found that to be true in my environment, I have also found > that MOST smbd's end up on Core 0 MOST of the time. This is true even > if I am hammering a 10 Gigabit network adapter (i.e., sending out 700 > MB/sec via Samba distributed to 30 users), with total CPU utilization > only about 70 percent of one core. > > Maybe this is optimal behavior. I tried to start a thread on this list > a while back about understanding what WOULD be optimal, and nobody had > much to say. > > I think it would be an interesting discussion. NFS seems to make use of > multicores in a more even way. That doesn't mean the NFS behavior is > better.
smbd is a userspace process, so we don't do anything clever w.r.t. distributing ourselves across cores, only let the OS do it's stuff. I'm guessing in your case you're seeing the effects of the OS accumulating the network interrupt traffic on the one processor that's handling that card. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
