Re: patch to add option to set schedulers by percentage

I've amended the commit on my branch as described in my previous message,
please refetch.

https://github.com/erlang/otp/pull/58

thanks,
--steve



On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Steve Vinoski <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Lukas,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. After our IRC conversation today covering the
> details of this issue, I agree it's clearer if this patch doesn't introduce
> order dependencies between +S and +SP options or introduce accumulated
> effects of multiple +SP options. I'll change my branch to do the following:
>
> * ensure that later +SP options on the command line completely replace any
> previous +SP options, so there's no accumulated effects between them (which
> implies "+SP 100:100" can undo any previous +SP options)
>
> * keep interactions between +S and +SP options, but remove ordering
> dependencies, thus your example "+S 16:16 +SP 50:50 +S 16:16" would result
> in [8:8] as you've specified, as would both "+SP 50:50 +S 16:16" and "+S
> 16:16 +SP 50:50"
>
> * document and add tests for the already-existing feature that +S 0:0
> undoes any prior +S options, resetting scheduler thread and scheduler
> thread online counts to their defaults for the host
>
> * document and add tests for the already-existing feature that specifying
> negative numbers for +S results in the specified values being subtracted
> from the scheduler thread and scheduler thread online counts
>
> I'll send another email when the branch is ready with these changes. Any
> other concerns, please let me know.
>
> thanks,
> --steve
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Lukas Larsson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  Hello Steve,
>>
>> Have you given any thoughts on what should happen if you chain multiple
>> +SP commands? i.e.
>>
>> erl +S 16:16 +SP 50:50 +SP 50:50
>>
>> Our view right now is that this should give [8:8] and not [4:4] as it
>> currently does in the patch.
>>
>> Related to this we also do not think that the order to +S vs +SP commands
>> should matter. i.e.
>>
>> erl +S 16:16 +SP 50:50 +S 16:16
>>
>> should give [8:8] and not [16:16].
>>
>> What do you think? These things are for sure odd cases to think about,
>> but if it is possible someone will for sure do it....
>>
>> Lukas
>>
>>
>> On 21/08/13 15:45, Steve Vinoski wrote:
>>
>>  For applications where measurements show enhanced performance from the
>> use of a non-default number of emulator scheduler threads, having to
>> accurately set the right number of scheduler threads across multiple hosts
>> each with different numbers of logical processors is difficult because the
>> erl +S option requires absolute numbers of scheduler threads and scheduler
>> threads online to be specified.
>>
>>  To address this issue, this patch adds a +SP option to erl, similar to
>> the existing +S option but allowing the number of scheduler threads and
>> scheduler threads online to be set as percentages of logical processors
>> configured and logical processors available, respectively. For example,
>> "+SP 50:25" sets the number of scheduler threads to 50% of the logical
>> processors configured, and the number of scheduler threads online to 25% of
>> the logical processors available.
>>
>>  https://github.com/erlang/otp/pull/58
>>
>>  --steve
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-patches mailing [email protected]://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches
>>
>>
>>
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-patches mailing list
[email protected]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-patches