[erlang-questions] beam.smp startup time regression

Björn-Egil Dahlberg wallentin.dahlberg@REDACTED
Fri Apr 4 19:57:54 CEST 2014

2014-04-04 19:46 GMT+02:00 Tuncer Ayaz <tuncer.ayaz@REDACTED>:

> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Björn-Egil Dahlberg <egil@REDACTED>
> 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.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list