From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 29 16:59:33 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376EA9E9 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:59:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.208.146]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8356100E for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:59:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.151.189]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239311E46477; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:59:29 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.208.146]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.151.189]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18778-08; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:59:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.5.250.150] (remote.ilcs.sd63.bc.ca [142.31.148.2]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 682E01E46475; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:59:27 -0300 (ADT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Subject: Re: Initial NFS Test: Linux vs FreeBSD (769% slower) From: "Marc G. Fournier" In-Reply-To: <1904620729.1184886.1367020597750.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:59:25 -0700 Message-Id: <5503E3D8-20A4-422E-A8E4-176DD64EB2D3@hub.org> References: <1904620729.1184886.1367020597750.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> To: Rick Macklem X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:59:33 -0000 On 2013-04-26, at 16:56 , Rick Macklem wrote: > If you didn't unmount/remount between writing jboss to the server and > timing the startup of it, please try it again after doing a = dismount/mount. > (Doing the dismount/mount on the Linux client resulted in the same # = of > reads as FreeBSD for a quick test I did, instead of none without the > dismount/remount.) 'k, this one was tried on Friday, and even a full server reboot didn't = make any difference in performance, whether the first run or subsequent = ones =85 its just plain fast =85 > A few other things to do: > - Time multiple startups after doing a mount, to see if it only the > first one that is slow. Tried =85 all are equally slow =85 best time so far has been ~230s =85 = yup, after several start ups, its pretty consistently around the 240s = mark =85 > - Capture the RPC counts for both clients by doing "nfsstat -c" before > and after the startup. FreeBSD: Before: Client Info: Rpc Counts: Getattr Setattr Lookup Readlink Read Write Create = Remove 2745853 821481 973901 18 2230947 2098303 160726 = 4954 Rename Link Symlink Mkdir Rmdir Readdir RdirPlus = Access 1862 0 0 14724 950 16272 0 = 329756 Mknod Fsstat Fsinfo PathConf Commit 12 30873 5 0 0 Rpc Info: TimedOut Invalid X Replies Retries Requests 0 0 0 0 9430761 Cache Info: Attr Hits Misses Lkup Hits Misses BioR Hits Misses BioW Hits = Misses 26322016 2745853 20537972 973869 2373488 2225801 2618800 = 2097243 BioRLHits Misses BioD Hits Misses DirE Hits Misses Accs Hits = Misses 1262 18 46863 15678 29941 0 22513185 = 329759 After: Client Info: Rpc Counts: Getattr Setattr Lookup Readlink Read Write Create = Remove 2745919 821481 973912 18 2230947 2098303 160726 = 4954 Rename Link Symlink Mkdir Rmdir Readdir RdirPlus = Access 1862 0 0 14724 950 16272 0 = 329767 Mknod Fsstat Fsinfo PathConf Commit 12 30873 5 0 0 Rpc Info: TimedOut Invalid X Replies Retries Requests 0 0 0 0 9430849 Cache Info: Attr Hits Misses Lkup Hits Misses BioR Hits Misses BioW Hits = Misses 26323022 2745919 20538207 973880 2374208 2225801 2618800 = 2097243 BioRLHits Misses BioD Hits Misses DirE Hits Misses Accs Hits = Misses 1262 18 46863 15678 29941 0 22513489 = 329770 Okay, if I'm reading the above right =85 there doesn't look to be *alot* = of difference between the Before n After =85 it doesn't look like its = downing a whole lot of NFS ops =85 am I reading wrong? > If the above doesn't give you any good hints w.r.t. why it is slow, > you can capture packets during the startup for both clients and look > at them in wireshark, to try and figure out what the difference = between > the Linux and FreeBSD clients are for this case. If the above nfsstat output indicates this is warranted, then please = provide more information on what I should run =85