# @distributed fails for many workers?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/distributed-fails-for-many-workers/24145>\
**Category:** Julia at Scale\
**Created:** [May 12, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/distributed-fails-for-many-workers/24145 "2019-05-12T17:33:50Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dkiese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/71e660/32.png) [@dkiese](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/dkiese)\
**Post date:** [May 14, 2019, 10:00am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/distributed-fails-for-many-workers/24145/22 "2019-05-14T10:00:14Z")

</div>

I dont know I would have to test. Do you mean there is only 48 workers possible at max?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![johnh](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/johnh/32/3615_2.png) [@johnh](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/johnh)\
**Post date:** [May 14, 2019, 10:10am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/distributed-fails-for-many-workers/24145/23 "2019-05-14T10:10:19Z")

</div>

No. That ‘count’ value seems to affect the blocking/nonblocking nature -I cant figure out exactly how.  
However, I am no the wrong track.

The environment variable UV\_THREADPOOL\_SIZE defaults to 4  
I think we should increase it.  
I think I better shut up here - I am not adding any value.

[Previous page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/distributed-fails-for-many-workers/24145.md?page=1)