Messages in this thread |  | | From | Neil Brown <> | Date | Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:22:08 +1000 (EST) | Subject | Re: nfs is stupid ("getfh failed") |
| |
On September 12, marcus@cendio.se wrote: > neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au (Neil Brown) writes: > > > On September 10, marcus@cendio.se wrote: > > > cachefs sucks. It doesn't seem to cache stat(2) information. > > > Doing ls -F in a ~100-entries directory takes several seconds over > > > a link with 50ms round-trip time. > > > > Well, I said "concept" not "implementation", but I suspect that > > Solaris cachefs does cache stat information. Maybe you just need to > > increase the timeouts for the attribute cache. > > Considering that I did several ls'es on the order of milliseconds > apart I doubt that would help...
Odd.. I just tried out cachefs (for the first time) on Solaris2.6. I mounted my home directory (which has 125 entries) and did ls -F while watching network traffic.
Except of the first time, and after every 30 seconds (the default attribute cache timeout) there was only 1 RPC request for each ls -F and that was to check the modify time on the directory. But then that is exactly the same traffic that I see when I do ls -F in my home directory over normal NFS (v2).
I could do 100 "ls -F" runns in about 4 seconds. This is on regular 100Mbit ethernet.
NeilBrown - 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/
|  |