From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 17 17:26:57 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457C016A402 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:26:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B5D43D48 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:26:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF804B81F; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:26:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (zoraida.natserv.net [66.114.65.147]) by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2747B81D; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:26:55 -0400 (EDT) References: <17475.43946.264571.52593@canoe.dclg.ca> Message-ID: X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/ From: Francisco Reyes To: David Gilbert Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:26:55 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Cc: FreeBSD ISP Subject: Re: What machine connected to particular nfsd? X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 17:26:57 -0000 David Gilbert writes: > Yeah. There shouldn't be any such relationship. NFSd's service the > queue of independant NFS requests independantly. When we say that NFS > is stateless, we mean that each NFS request is independant of other > NFS requests --- and that means that there's no requirement for any > NFS process to service on client's requests. Right. That makes sense. > Anyways... our current NFS implementation makes one NFSd very busy and > the remaining NFSd's exponentially less busy on average. In fact, you > can think of the number of NFSd processes as "concurrency" in NFS I/O, > not clients. True. Had forgotten about that. While on the topic of nfs a few questions. What would be a good way to determine how many nfsd proccesses one should have? I erred in the side of caution since had to literally through an NFS setup into production without been able to do much testing. Set 35 processes. My busiest nfsd are: 250 hours 50 " 24 " 11 " 7 " 4 " 3 " 2 " 1 " The rest are under 1 hour. Does that mean that I should be ok with 10 processes? To kill the least active ones, I just "kill" them? or is there a better way to restart the whole nfs server side? > trafshow will more quickly give you a handle on the traffic per > client. Thanks much. I see two versions in the port. Trafshow and trafshow3. Which one you recommedd?