Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 21 Feb 2024 20:16:21 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        fs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 277197] NFS is much too slow at 10GbaseT
Message-ID:  <bug-277197-3630-UfRuJxOQvF@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-277197-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-277197-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D277197

--- Comment #2 from Hannes Hauswedell <h2+fbsdports@fsfe.org> ---
Thanks for the reply!

With rsize=3D262144,wsize=3D262144 I get 293 MiB/s.
With rsize=3D1048576,wsize=3D1048576 I get 395 MiB/s. This is already an
improvement, but still not where I would like to have it.

nconnect and readahead don't seem to make much of a difference. NFS3 vs NFS4
also not.

Interestingly, if I boot Linux on the client, and perform a regular NFS mou=
nt
with no options supplied, I get almost 600 MiB/s. This was even performed
before changing the server setting. It seems to indicate that our problems =
are
client-side.

These are the options that Linux reports as used:
```
rw,relatime,vers=3D3,rsize=3D131072,wsize=3D131072,namlen=3D255,hard,proto=
=3Dtcp,timeo=3D600,retrans=3D2,sec=3Dsys,mountaddr=3D1.3.1.2,mountvers=3D3,=
mountport=3D820,mountproto=3Dudp,local_lock=3Dnone,addr=3D1.3.1.2
```

So it seems to get a much higher throughput with lower rsize and wsize. I w=
ill
try Linux next with higher rsize and wsize.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-277197-3630-UfRuJxOQvF>