[erlang-questions] beam.smp startup time regression

Björn-Egil Dahlberg <>
Fri Apr 4 19:57:54 CEST 2014


2014-04-04 19:46 GMT+02:00 Tuncer Ayaz <>:

> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Björn-Egil Dahlberg <>
> wrote:
> > Async threads are there for a reason. If your threads (schedulers
> > hangs on files - nfs for instance) you are in big trouble, time will
> > not progress in the system - hence the async threads. This has been
> > reiterated many times on this list.
>
> Sure, I won't argue with that, but the change from +A0 to +A10 was
> made in R16, so was async-threads support experimental in the past?
> I'd have to check the archives, but IIRC, +A10 was made the default
> for some other reason, so if it was a bad idea to run +A0, why did it
> take this long for the default to change. Did everyone, including the
> OTP team, always override the default?
>
>
When the mechanism of "thread progress" was introduced to increase runtime
scalability the schedulers became more sensitive to long interruptions.
 Rickard does not like to acknowledge this, but I think he would at least
agree that the symptom became more plain. That's why 10 async threads
became the default. I say it again .. don't mess with the schedulers. ^^

The problem was there before but it was not as hostile. =)

// Björn-Egil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20140404/b0dd200f/attachment.html>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list