At Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:35:46 +0800, Liu Yuan wrote: > > On 10/22/2012 02:50 PM, Liu Yuan wrote: > > On 10/22/2012 02:43 PM, MORITA Kazutaka wrote: > >> I think of trying it, but I wish more users would test it too. > > > > I have tested it on my laptop and get the similar result. > > > > What I am only concerned is that if pthread signal & wakeup use a signal > > wakeup queue instead of multi-queues, the wakeup itself would be huge > > bottleneck. I'll try to figure it out what pthread signal use. For > > pthread_create, which use clone() sys call that scale well on SMP machine. > > > > pthread signal use Futex, it might not be a scaling problem. But the new > queue_work() are serialized by a mutex (cond_mutex), so probably your > patch set won't perform as well as single IO source against heavy > multiple IO sources, which is the normal use case?
Processing parallel I/O is more common. I'll try to do the benchmark and improve this patch if it doesn't show a good performance. Thanks, Kazutaka -- sheepdog mailing list sheepdog@lists.wpkg.org http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/sheepdog