Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 04:39:41 -0700 (PDT) From: intech <sdenic@intech.co.rs> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HAST initial sync speed Message-ID: <1371123581091-5819759.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <4C6BDBB9.3020007@gibfest.dk> References: <4C61CF4D.4060009@gibfest.dk> <4C651B7E.5000805@gibfest.dk> <4C6B08BD.9080206@gibfest.dk> <20100818110655.GA2177@garage.freebsd.pl> <4C6BC0BA.9030303@gibfest.dk> <4C6BC35B.9040000@gibfest.dk> <20100818121133.GC2177@garage.freebsd.pl> <4C6BD521.1060807@gibfest.dk> <20100818125856.GE2177@garage.freebsd.pl> <4C6BDBB9.3020007@gibfest.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thought this threat is almost 3 years old, I want to ask if this MAX_SEND_SIZE adopted in freebsd 8.3 and even fbsd9.1? Indeed I have the same issue on 1Gb network - nodes performing sync at only 10MBytes/sec ?! and I can't figure out what is happening as network itself is not the problem, I tested it. And just one question fullsync is only option for HAST replication at time of writing, so could HAST perform at 100MB/sec in this mode, and when we expect memsync and async to be released? -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/HAST-initial-sync-speed-tp4027033p5819759.html Sent from the freebsd-fs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1371123581091-5819759.post>