![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 11:44:33AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 10:29:06PM -0700, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > På to , 15/04/2004 klokka 21:59, skreiv Phil Oester: > > > > > If simply upgrading from 2.4.x to 2.6.x is going to make UDP mounts unusable, > > > perhaps this should be documented -- or the option should be deprecated. > > > > Put simply: I am not interested in wasting _my_ time investigating cases > > where UDP is performing badly if TCP is working fine. The variable > > reliability issues with UDP are precisely why we worked to get the TCP > > stuff working efficiently. > > > > As for blanket statements like the above: I have seen no evidence yet > > that they are any more warranted in 2.6.x than they were in 2.4.x. At > > least not as long as I continue to see wire speed performance on reads > > and writes on UDP on all my own test setups. > > Maaybe TCP should be the default then ? Or just make a big warning in the Kconfig. Distros will set it to the default... > In case no one finds the reason > why NFS over UDP is slower on 2.6.x than 2.4.x. It seems there are > quite a few reports confirming the slowdown. Maybe Jamie Lokier is right in > theory? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:02 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||