From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
Subject: [ruby-core:81047] Re: [ruby-cvs:65407] normal:r58236 (trunk): thread.c: comments on M:N threading [ci skip]
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 05:12:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170509051223.GA31857@whir> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a1449c89-e1e3-e3e0-b01f-ec419aa2a514@atdot.net>
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
> On 2017/05/09 12:38, Eric Wong wrote:
> > 100 epoll FDs is a waste of FDs; especially since it is common
> > to have a 1024 FD limit. I already feel bad about timer thread
> > taking up two FDs; but maybe epoll/kevent can cut reduce that.
>
> 1024 soft limit and 4096 hard limit is an issue. However, if we employ
>
> > I can easily imagine Ruby doing 100 native threads in one process
> > (8 cores, 10-20 rotational disks, 2 SSD), but 20000-30000 fibers.
>
> 20000-30000 fibers, it is also problem if they have corresponding fds.
> So that I think people increase this limit upto 65K, don't?
Yes, for people that run 20000-30000 fibers maybe it is not a
problem to have 100 epoll FD...
However, for existing apps like puma, webrick and net/http-based
scripts: they can spawn dozens/hundreds of threads and only use
one socket per thread. It is a waste to use epoll/kqueue to
watch a few number of FD per thread (ppoll is more appropriate
for watching a single FD).
On the contrary; software like nginx and cmogstored watch
thousands of FDs with a single epoll|kqueue FD.
> > In the kernel, every "struct eventpoll" + "struct file" in
> > Linux is at least 400 bytes of unswappable kernel memory.
>
> 400B * 100 = 40KB. Is it problem? I have no knowledge to evaluate this
> size (10 pages seems not so small, I guess).
I'd rather not use that much memory and save whereever possible.
> > OK, I can rename my work-in-progress patch with
> > s/rb_thread_context_t/rb_execution_context_t/ and commit
> > later tonight.
>
> Ah, that was my plan and I'm not sure what is suitable name (always I
> consumes long time for naming problem). But if you don't feel weird,
> please use execution_context (ec).
OK, I committed as r58614
> Do you want to commit your patch into trunk immediately and change them
> for "(2-1: extend Fiber)" later? Another way is to make "(2-1: extend
> Fiber)" first (in another branch or git repository) and commit it. The
> latter can reduce total patch size.
OK, I will work on implementing epoll/kqueue support late this
week or weekend. I will also keep a select() fallback for
portability to systems w/o epoll|kqueue.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-09 4:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20170402011414.AEA9B64CEE@svn.ruby-lang.org>
[not found] ` <8a2b82e3-dc07-1945-55f9-5a474e89130b@ruby-lang.org>
2017-04-02 2:35 ` [ruby-core:80531] Re: [ruby-cvs:65407] normal:r58236 (trunk): thread.c: comments on M:N threading [ci skip] Eric Wong
2017-04-02 3:05 ` [ruby-core:80532] " SASADA Koichi
2017-04-03 4:42 ` [ruby-core:80540] " Eric Wong
2017-05-08 0:33 ` [ruby-core:81027] " Eric Wong
2017-05-08 1:53 ` [ruby-core:81028] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-08 2:16 ` [ruby-core:81029] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-08 3:01 ` [ruby-core:81031] " Eric Wong
2017-05-08 3:42 ` [ruby-core:81033] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-08 6:36 ` [ruby-core:81035] " Eric Wong
2017-05-09 2:18 ` [ruby-core:81042] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-09 3:38 ` [ruby-core:81044] " Eric Wong
2017-05-09 4:11 ` [ruby-core:81045] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-09 5:12 ` Eric Wong [this message]
2017-05-09 5:47 ` [ruby-core:81049] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-09 6:23 ` [ruby-core:81053] " Eric Wong
2017-05-09 6:44 ` [ruby-core:81054] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-09 18:51 ` [ruby-core:81078] " Eric Wong
2017-05-10 3:24 ` [ruby-core:81083] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-10 10:04 ` [ruby-core:81089] " Eric Wong
2017-05-19 4:34 ` [ruby-core:81244] " Eric Wong
2017-06-20 19:16 ` [ruby-core:81733] " Eric Wong
2017-05-09 5:54 ` [ruby-core:81050] " SASADA Koichi
2017-05-09 6:15 ` [ruby-core:81052] " Eric Wong
2017-05-08 2:56 ` [ruby-core:81030] " Eric Wong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/community/mailing-lists/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170509051223.GA31857@whir \
--to=ruby-core@ruby-lang.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).