[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#4249) Threads value warning
--On Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:03 AM +0000 email@example.com wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-06 at 21:10 +0000, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>> Many people seem to abuse the "threads" directive in slapd.conf. I
>> think the man page and/or slapd should include some warning when threads
>> is set to high numbers (say > 32). I've seen some very odd/bizarre
>> thread values coming across through various postings (like 1,000 or
>> 10,000, etc).
> Sounds reasonable; I've applied a fix to HEAD. BTW, I've dug out a
> piece of code I wrote to allow relatively portable CPU number detection
> on SMP architectures
> it's GPL'ed, but as I'm the copyright holder and since it's very
> trivial, I think I could easily rework it to use in OpenLDAP. Apart
> from agreeing on the "right" algorithm for slapd, could it be useful to
> spawn as many threads as the available CPUs when running in tool mode?
It might be useful to have it do that if someone hasn't specified a
tool-threads parameter. However, Howard found that at least some times,
having more threads than CPU's is actually faster (on a 2 CPU system, 3
threads finished faster than 2 or 4 for him). So it depends somewhat on
the number of indices as well.
Principal Software Developer
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html