Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 May 1999 20:09:43 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        "Sergey Ayukov (mailing lists)" <asv1@crydee.sai.msu.ru>
Cc:        stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: NFS question..
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905102002340.447-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905102128080.5643-100000@crydee.sai.msu.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Sergey Ayukov (mailing lists) wrote:

> On Mon, 10 May 1999, Doug Rabson wrote:
> > 
> > It all depends on the value which you place on the data which the clients
> > are writing.
> 
> Yes, sure. In ideal case, I would love to mount some directories with less
> reliable settings and some with more reliable... This reminds me about
> ages long discussion on whether writes should be cached at all (it was
> thriving when DOS Smartdrive finally got an option to enable write
> caching). My opinion is that they should be cached. After all, it is
> impossible to get good performance out of NFSv2 when not doing write
> caching. Whether you will rely on UPS or just pray for data to be safe is
> another question.

The data is cached (subsequent reads will come from the cache). I don't
expect FreeBSD's defaults to change on this since it does violate the spec
and a much better (safer) fix is to use NFSv3.

> > Could I have a copy of your test program? The 100Mbit performance ought to
> > be better than this.
> 
> Test program is File Commander for OS/2, available from many places, e.g. 
> ftp://hobbes.nmsu.edu/pub/incoming/fc2_210.zip

Hmm. Not too useful to me since I don't run OS/2. I wonder what sized
requests are made by the OS/2 NFS client. That can affect performance
considerably. Without knowing the pattern of NFS calls the test makes, it
is impossible to speculate on what is causing the performance loss.

> > I would have thought the OS/2 client could use SMB.  I thought the
> > performance of samba was pretty good on FreeBSD. Perhaps it could be tuned
> > a bit (samba has a boatload of tuning parameters).
> 
> I don't know why I am having such a bad luck with FreeBSD, but I am only
> getting about 300KB/s on writes over 10MBit network while exchange between
> Windoze machines yields about 900KB/s. Someday I will try SMB client on
> OS/2, but I was pretty happy with NFS -- until I switched to FreeBSD.

Try reading the Samba documentation (in the docs/textdocs subdirectory of
the samba source code).

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 442 9037




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" 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.4.05.9905102002340.447-100000>