Bug#364607: horrible nfs read performance
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 23:13 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 05:25:15PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Using TCP for NFS is the default and is generally recommended.
> >
> > The problem you originally reported involved poorer performance for the
> > clients using a gigabit link than those using a 100-megabit link
> > <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=364607#5>. Based on
> > your latest results
> > <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=364607#32>, this
> > appears to have been fixed.
> >
> > So, if you still think you are seeing "horrible read performance", what
> > are you comparing with?
>
> Arthur, what did you compare against?
The server in the first test was a Debian (lenny?) server running a
2.4.32 kernel with nfs-kernel-server 1:1.0.6-3.1. The latest test was
done with Debian/etch as server with 2.6.18-6-686 and nfs-common
1:1.0.10-6+etch.1.
In the latest test I didn't put any of the machines back to 1Gbit but
for host2 and host3 read performance over UDP is considerably slower
than over TCP (both hosts have Gbit interfaces but are patched at
100Mbit).
--
-- arthur de jong - arthur@west.nl - west consulting b.v. --
Reply to: