-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 702
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Increase the IO_THREADS_MAX_NUM. #1220
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was the number
16
decided earlier for users to avoid shooting themselves in the foot i.e. performance will start deteriorating beyond that count?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IIRC, we use 3 bits in an robj to store which thread allocated an robj, so it can be passed back to be freed by the same thread.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So, we can't blindly increase this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe not. :) Can you look it up?
There was some discussion related to the PR #763.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems i was wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@hpatro Per my testing before, we will observe a significant performance degradation when the io-threads number greater than online CPUs, this issue still exists with the new valkey async IO, the spinning io-threads preempt CPU from main thread. It should have no relationship with the
16
number. I remember @madolson suggested to trust the operators :). redis/redis#13003The number
16
@uriyage responded in https://github.com/valkey-io/valkey-private/pull/6#discussion_r1597652783 before, he couldn't observe any improvement beyond 8-10 threads anyway. Not sure if he tested the larger payloads (in MBs).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The work to limit the number of IO threads was so that we could send free requests to the same thread that allocated as was mentioned. For various reasons we decided to not commit to that as part of the V1, but I believe it's on one of the follow items: #761.
I do believe in trusting operators/admins. (Never trust application developers though, they shoot themselves in the foot). We should definitely be "sane" by default, but give power users the operational tools to do advanced things.
However, it goes from 4 bits to 8 bits, which I think is probably OK.