Re: [PATCH 05/15] RDS: increase size of hash-table to 8K

[David Miller]

From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 19:04:42 -0400

> Even with per bucket locking scheme, in a massive parallel
> system with active rds sockets which could be in excess of multiple
> of 10K, rds_bin_lookup() workload is siginificant because of smaller
> hashtable size.
> 
> With some tests, it was found that we get modest but still nice
> reduction in rds_bind_lookup with bigger bucket.
> 
> 	Hashtable	Baseline(1k)	Delta
> 	2048:		8.28%     	-2.45%
> 	4096:		8.28%		-4.60%
> 	8192:		8.28%		-6.46%
> 	16384:		8.28%		-6.75%
> 
> Based on the data, we set 8K as the bind hash-table size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxxxxxx>

Like others I would strongly prefer that you use a dynamically sized
hash table.

Eating 8k just because a module just happened to get loaded is really
not appropriate.

And there are many other places that use such a scheme, one example is
the AF_NETLINK socket hash table.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/