From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 2 02:33:32 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A54C91B; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 02:33:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from esa-annu.net.uoguelph.ca (esa-annu.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B55B12F3; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 02:33:31 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqQEAKat7VKDaFve/2dsb2JhbABYg0RXgwG6EE+BHnSCJQEBAQMBAQEBICsgCwUWGAICDRkCKQEJJgYIBwQBHASHXAgNqzWhCxeBKY0PAQEbNAeCb4FJBIlJjA6EBZBvg0seMYEEOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,760,1384318800"; d="scan'208";a="92397775" Received: from muskoka.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.222]) by esa-annu.net.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 01 Feb 2014 21:33:24 -0500 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59BAFB4023; Sat, 1 Feb 2014 21:33:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 21:33:24 -0500 (EST) From: Rick Macklem To: J David Message-ID: <2004489072.1389912.1391308404358.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Terrible NFS performance under 9.2-RELEASE? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.203] X-Mailer: Zimbra 7.2.1_GA_2790 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/7.2.1_GA_2790) Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Garrett Wollman X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 02:33:32 -0000 J David wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Rick Macklem > wrote: > > You can certainly try "-o rsize=61440,wsize=61440" (assuming a 4K > > page size) > > for the mount, if you'd like. > > This has previously been tested with all 4k steps between 16k and > 32k. > All of them perform worse than > > With 61440, NFS fails outright on the random read test: > > $ iozone -e -I -s 1g -r 4k -i 0 -i 2 > Just curious. Are you always using "-I" (which sets O_DIRECT, I think?) or was it just this particular test? rick > Iozone: Performance Test of File I/O > > Version $Revision: 3.420 $ > > Compiled for 64 bit mode. > > Build: freebsd > > [...] > > Include fsync in write timing > > O_DIRECT feature enabled > > File size set to 1048576 KB > > Record Size 4 KB > > Command line used: iozone -e -I -s 1g -r 4k -i 0 -i 2 > > Output is in Kbytes/sec > > Time Resolution = 0.000005 seconds. > > Processor cache size set to 1024 Kbytes. > > Processor cache line size set to 32 bytes. > > File stride size set to 17 * record size. > > random > random bkwd record stride > > KB reclen write rewrite read reread read > write read rewrite read fwrite frewrite fread freread > > 1048576 4 24688 23891 > > Error reading block at 1073729536 > > read: Bad file descriptor > > > Upon using the -w option, which leaves the file intact on exit, it's > possible to see that it's not even 1gig in length: > > $ ls -aln iozone.tmp > > -rw-r----- 1 1000 0 1073709056 Feb 1 01:18 iozone.tmp > > > It's 32k short, which is a pretty surprising result. > > Thanks! > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >