From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:00:24 -0400 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <4fa1305e0f56a0ef89c2e05320fa5997@coraid.com> In-Reply-To: References: <5fa9fbfe115a9cd5a81d0feefe413192@quintile.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] A simple experiment Topicbox-Message-UUID: 119adb76-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Wed Apr 28 13:58:40 EDT 2010, newsham@lava.net wrote: > > I admit I am surprised by how much a difference there is, it should > > be just Tread and Rread headers shouldn't it? > > If you have high latency or high bandwidth, the maximum message > size for the 9p messages will be too small to keep the pipe full > if you're using read serially. Did you take a look at how much > bandwith was actually in use during your tests? unless you've got some sort of interrupt or cpu bottleneck, i don't see what message size has to do with this issue. the real issue is the # of messages outstanding. - erik