lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Mar]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Why is NFS in 2.0.3? slow


On Mon, 23 Mar 1998, David S. Miller wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 16:32:29 -0800
> From: Jason Venner <jason@idiom.com>
>
> I get 500k/sec for NFS traffic. This really sucks.
> Doesn't seem to matter Read or Write.
> I don't do TCP/IP. I don't set any block sizes, just use defaults on
> the mounts.
>
> That is pretty horrific, I do agree. I remember that when Olaf first
> coded up the new NFS code he was able to get ~4MB/s NFS in the lab of
> Linux boxes last year at Linux Expo. Whether he tuned parameters
> etc. to get that, I don't know. If he did, we need to investigate our
> default parameters a bit to see if we can find more suitable settings.

I can get throughput in the neighborhood of 4MB/sec. between my Alpha UDB
and a P150+ over 100-Base ethernet. Both are running 2.1.90 kernels and
fitted with Netgear FA310TX "tulip" network adapters.

However, there is room for improvement. At work, I administer a cluster
of AlphaStation 600/333 boxes linked with 100Base, and have measured
almost 10MB/sec. copying large files between them! Granted, we're talking
expensive machines, Digital Unix 4.0 and NFS-v3 but, hey, it's something
to shoot for <g>.

Steve



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.050 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site