From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Aug 22 03:17:03 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id DAA18919 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 03:17:03 -0700 Received: from aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw ([140.109.40.248]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id DAA18912 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 03:16:54 -0700 Received: (from taob@localhost) by aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA01577; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 18:16:29 +0800 Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 18:16:28 +0800 (CST) From: Brian Tao To: "Amancio Hasty Jr." cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Making a FreeBSD NFS server In-Reply-To: <199508202344.QAA11053@rah.star-gate.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, Amancio Hasty Jr. wrote: > > Curious then, where is the time being spend in the NFS code? > > Given that we can drive the ethernet at near capacity and that the > disks are very fast . It pretty much leads me to believe that > the NFS code or protocol is the bottle neck. Are you talking about the case of synchronous writes to a FreeBSD NFS server? I don't expect the bandwidth in the other cases to climb any higher (already in the 800K/sec to 900K/sec range over 10Mbps Ethernet). -- Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org