From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jan 24 05:10:36 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7B64E0
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 05:10:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22d.google.com (mail-ie0-x22d.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22d])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6AAD144A
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 05:10:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ie0-f173.google.com with SMTP id e14so2350263iej.4
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:10:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
 :from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=RIDSEQZS3Ao8mYEnqUqkWU/PW5PvMfMVnRB+6nejkVI=;
 b=e0j5M3A8v5nFyFdVob/iIw+VY7Gpkg9XDkTTOfY/ezF9eXcEG9I1nD2FRwTlFMkvwB
 UXNj7bzXfIRmsihzwuGy4D0IMSgE8ChUwLwmfiCX80QGayCV39zfIE4sFdcXYJMKwzyb
 zAnqaqFUNxDz8Y6jEMftRrneLlVaoNIMag0w0jQHQIx3YtH/dvCuBkQlimEB/HolL8OY
 iJDv6hDRTPjXGDCMVxvAeXSeKcd1nXb2Bhkkp0Cw20o/gzCbwMd1mViy+irFy3kUJc+5
 14HRrrnhBLcGctuyJeRohNQ6VxtrBfofHM3es7jOhYsLbnGS4FuzljnQo1epEkVxC9Jk
 QQAg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.43.161.2 with SMTP id me2mr9398038icc.20.1390540235829; Thu,
 23 Jan 2014 21:10:35 -0800 (PST)
Sender: jdavidlists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.42.170.8 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:10:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <58591523.15519962.1390533482068.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
References: <CABXB=RR5NgRpqXA8XQDks3HhxC6QQW3aG+sH4BUxFL7kbFuJ_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <58591523.15519962.1390533482068.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 00:10:35 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: wwCUo9SZWjjCfOtsvpA1hibDDaA
Message-ID: <CABXB=RRP=N5_sOQrhov_3WVHd3awRjT4-oqd-BUrKgmPPk6fpg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Terrible NFS performance under 9.2-RELEASE?
From: J David <j.david.lists@gmail.com>
To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 05:10:36 -0000

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> I didn't mention this before, but using UFS will give you more realistic
> results than using mfs, since mfs would never be used for a real NFS
> server and never gets tested as an exported NFS file system.

That's my mistake; I said "mfs" but what I meant was:

$ sudo mdconfig -a -t swap -s 2g

md0

$ sudo newfs -U /dev/md0

/dev/md0: 2048.0MB (4194304 sectors) block size 32768, fragment size 4096

using 4 cylinder groups of 512.03MB, 16385 blks, 65664 inodes.

with soft updates

super-block backups (for fsck_ffs -b #) at:

 192, 1048832, 2097472, 3146112

$ sudo mount /dev/md0 /mnt

$ cat /etc/exports

/mnt -alldirs -maproot=root 172.20.20.166 172.20.20.168 172.20.20.169


So it absolute is UFS, just backed by RAM, and I just forgot that
"mfs" is only properly used to refer to that read-only memory blob
filesystem used for miniroots.

Sorry for any confusion.

Thanks!