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

[santosh shilimkar]

On 9/21/2015 4:05 PM, David Miller wrote:
> 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.

OK. Thanks for AF_NETLINK pointer. I will look it up.

Regards,
Santosh
--
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/