From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 29 09:39:59 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18C8D1065699; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:39:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il) Received: from cs1.cs.huji.ac.il (cs1.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC1C08FC25; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:39:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il) Received: from pampa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.32]) by cs1.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp id 1KkFET-000A7V-CO; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:39:57 +0300 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2 To: "Claus Guttesen" In-reply-to: References: <20080926081806.GA19055@icarus.home.lan> <20080926095230.GA20789@icarus.home.lan> Comments: In-reply-to "Claus Guttesen" message dated "Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:40:05 +0200." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:39:57 +0300 From: Danny Braniss Message-ID: Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick , Robert Watson , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bad NFS/UDP performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:39:59 -0000 > > it more difficult than I expected. > > for one, the kernel date was missleading, the actual source update is the key, so > > the window of changes is now 28/July to 19/August. I have the diffs, but nothing > > yet seems relevant. > > > > on the other hand, I tried NFS/TCP, and there things seem ok, ie the 'good' and the 'bad' > > give the same throughput, which seem to point to UDP changes ... > > Can you post the network-numbers? [again :-] > > Writing 16 MB file > > BS Count /---- 7.0 ------/ /---- 7.1 -----/ should now read: /---- Aug 18 ------/ /--- Aug 19 ----/ > > 1*512 32768 0.16s 98.11MB/s 0.43s 37.18MB/s > > 2*512 16384 0.17s 92.04MB/s 0.46s 34.79MB/s > > 4*512 8192 0.16s 101.88MB/s 0.43s 37.26MB/s > > 8*512 4096 0.16s 99.86MB/s 0.44s 36.41MB/s > > 16*512 2048 0.16s 100.11MB/s 0.50s 32.03MB/s > > 32*512 1024 0.26s 61.71MB/s 0.46s 34.79MB/s > > 64*512 512 0.22s 71.45MB/s 0.45s 35.41MB/s > > 128*512 256 0.21s 77.84MB/s 0.51s 31.34MB/s > > 256*512 128 0.19s 82.47MB/s 0.43s 37.22MB/s > > 512*512 64 0.18s 87.77MB/s 0.49s 32.69MB/s > > 1024*512 32 0.18s 89.24MB/s 0.47s 34.02MB/s > > 2048*512 16 0.17s 91.81MB/s 0.30s 53.41MB/s > > 4096*512 8 0.16s 100.56MB/s 0.42s 38.07MB/s > > 8192*512 4 0.82s 19.56MB/s 0.80s 19.95MB/s > > 16384*512 2 0.82s 19.63MB/s 0.95s 16.80MB/s > > 32768*512 1 0.81s 19.69MB/s 0.96s 16.64MB/s > > > > Average: 75.86 33.00