From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 1 15:46:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7646610656BB for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:46:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 321378FC1B for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:46:31 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwEACESfkyDaFvO/2dsb2JhbACDGJ45rGuSD4EigyRzBIoU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.56,304,1280721600"; d="scan'208";a="92484580" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-jnhn-pri.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 01 Sep 2010 11:46:27 -0400 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82A6DB3F0A; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 11:46:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 11:46:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem To: Hannes Hauswedell Message-ID: <2070918035.372723.1283355990476.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <201009011339.15898.h2+freebsd@fsfe.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [24.65.230.102] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.7_GA_2476.RHEL4 (ZimbraWebClient - SAF3 (Mac)/6.0.7_GA_2473.RHEL4_64) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is NFSv4 so slow? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:46:32 -0000 > Hi everyone, >=20 > I am experiencing similar issues with newnfs: >=20 > 1) I have two clients that each get around 0.5MiB/s to 2.6MiB/s > reading > from the NFS4-share on Gbit-Lan >=20 > 2) Mounting with -t newnfs -o nfsv3 results in no performance gain > whatsoever. >=20 > 3) Mounting with -t nfs results in 58MiB/s ! (Netcat has similar > performance) =E2=86=92 not a hardware/driver issue from my pov >=20 The experimental client does reads in larger MAXBSIZE chunks, which did cause a similar problem in Mac OS X until rsize=3D32768,wsize=3D32768 was specified. Rick already tried that, but you might want to try it for your case. > Is there anything I can do to help fix this? >=20 Ok, so it does sound like an issue in the experimental client and not NFSv4. For the most part, the read code is the same as the regular client, but it hasn't been brought up-to-date with recent changes. One thing you could try is building a kernel without SMP enabled and see if that helps? (I only have single core hardware, so I won't see any SMP races.) If that helps, I can compare the regular vs experimental client for smp locking in the read stuff. rick