From owner-freebsd-scsi Wed Apr 8 09:55:29 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA10372 for freebsd-scsi-outgoing; Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:55:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.213.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA10325 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:55:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tom@sdf.com) Received: from tom by misery.sdf.com with smtp (Exim 1.82 #3) id 0yMxjd-0001Py-00; Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:30:01 -0700 Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:30:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom To: Kyle McPeek cc: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CAM Performance... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Kyle McPeek wrote: > Tom, > > I forgot to mention the nfs file server is a network appliance, raid 4 > and very fast. Very few things I can do to tune it. I don't think any > improvements can be found there, except maybe nfs V3? > > The network is all 100MB switched. I have tested both 10 and 100mb > speeds and the transfer rate at 100mb is about twice that of 10mb. 10 MB > seems to be slowed down by the network, but 100mb appears to be slowed > down by the disk. Well, 100mbs should give you almost 10MB/s. Two Barracuda's stripped together should be able to almost that. > The clients all have 64meg of memory. Would softupdates help on an > unmounted partition? > I will try 64K blocks. Oh, raw partition. Softupdates won't help. 64k blocks will help a LOT then. The very small blocks you were using before would be slow and since it wasn't a multiple of 512 bytes, it would be somewhat inefficient. You probably want to strip two disks together and use the raw /dev/ccd0c device. A 16k or 32k strip size would probably be best for your application. Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message