can I let all winbindd processes accept connections like nginx does

[Ira Cooper]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:05:10PM -0500, Ira Cooper wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote:
> >      On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 04:30:51PM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> >      > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:11:59PM +0800, Tom wrote:
> >      > > Yes, I have already done some performance tuning before I sent
> my
> >      first email to this email list.
> >      > > The CPU utilization of all the child winbindd processes are no
> >      more than 10 percent.
> >      > > The CPU utilization of the parent winbindd processes is about
> 30-
> >      40 percent.
> >      > > I found the parent winbindd process spent a lot of CPU time on
> >      'poll' syscall, seems it can't handle so many concurrent connections
> >      well.
> >      >
> >      > Ok, poll is bad. What platform are you on? Linux has epoll,
> >      > which we have support for. This is definitely required for
> >      > that kind of load. If it's something else, we have a bit
> >      > more work ahead, we would need to write a tevent backend for
> >      > kqueue or /dev/poll.
> >
> >      I wrote a Solaris "ports" backend for tevent for
> >      my own amusement.
> >
> >      It's performance is *worse* (according to Ira :-).
> >
> > I'm not sure I ever benchmarked it.
> >
> > I was too busy to test it... alas. :/
>
> That's not what I recall in email, however my
> memory is very flakey :-).
>
> Maybe I just misinterpreted your response, or
> maybe you were too embarassed to admit you
> hadn't tested it :-) :-).
>

No... I think you took 2 things and confused them ;).

1. I never tested it.  Alas.  I wanted to, but it was down my list of
things to do.
2. I did see the *potential* for improvements.  I saw the construction of
the poll structures in the profiling I was doing, and I may have said THAT
to you.

But... I never could get the time to actually get the ports based backend
tested.  Despite there being very good reasons for me to want a finished
ports based backend, at that time.  (It would make writing something to do
file notification based on ports, possible.)

So I suspect faulty memory^W^Wmisinterpretation on your part here ;-).

-Ira