Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 12 Nov 1998 16:25:14 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Phillip Salzman <psalzman@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net>
To:        "Jason J. Horton" <jason@intercom.com>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Is it soup yet? FreeBSD NFS
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811121622550.4025-100000@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net>
In-Reply-To: <364B08C3.27FE59A4@intercom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Check out:

http://www.spatula.net/proc/linux|142401dc8b9c927d821519d547d9a0fa8200/linux.lame.nfs.src

which was written by Alfred Perlstein


--
Phillip Salzman

On Thu, 12 Nov 1998, Jason J. Horton wrote:

> Everyone seems to be talking about using FreeBSD as an NFS client,
> how does FreeBSD do as a NFS server?
> 
>     -J
> 
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Brian Feldman wrote:
> >
> > > > > When we "catch up" to Linux, for every advance, we always have a
> > > > > better-implemented version of whatever new has been gotten on Linux. Maybe
> > > > > except for NFS.... but that's being working on, eh?
> > > >
> > > > I hope you are refering to Linux NFS being far inferior to FreeBSD's
> > > > impelementation.  If you are not then where do we fall behind?  I haven't
> > > > seen Linux outperform FreeBSD in any NFS work i've done.
> > >
> > > Last I had heard, NFS was still too unstable to be used heavily in
> > > FreeBSD, but "worked" in Linux. But, who knows for sure? I don't run any
> > > Linux systems, and I don't really use NFS in FreeBSD.
> >
> > Then perhaps you should stay quiet on the issue.
> >
> > FreeBSD has outperformed linux by several orders of magnitude in client
> > side NFS for a long time.  The newer linux development kernels come close,
> > but when concurrent NFS requests are made Linux chokes while FreeBSD
> > maintains a broadband'ish state.
> >
> > I know i posted several times about problems with NFS (about a month ago)
> > but since McKusik's fixes I've yet to have a problem.
> >
> > In so far as serving NFS... the Linux userland NFS server is hardly a
> > match to the FreeBSD kernel impelementation.  Stability is another matter
> > and I haven't seen enough to say anything conclusive for either side.
> > Both implementations suffer from lack of support for files > 2gb in
> > client side requests which should be addressed, somehow/somewhen.
> >
> > A recent Linux article suggests that Linux NFS will bipass the "mbuf"
> > layer, ie. the NFS code will directly reassemble packets into RPC requests
> > thereby saving _one_ copy of memory.  This is really neat, but then makes
> > NFS dependant on the protocols which it is supposed to be independant of.
> >
> > Btw, Mike Smith's new ACCESS caching seems quite stable and i was
> > wondering if it had been commited.
> >
> > -Alfred
> >
> > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9811121622550.4025-100000>