From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 6 22:31:14 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA38C57 for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2013 22:31:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@my.gd) Received: from mail-we0-f178.google.com (mail-we0-f178.google.com [74.125.82.178]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7194D17FF for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2013 22:31:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u53so2809126wes.9 for ; Sat, 06 Jul 2013 15:31:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date :to:x-gm-message-state; bh=3w41bGa92uT6fZC6gw1i6HUKL2DaSD+J/X/CX10CKYg=; b=Yb1zeKvAAzqN6T3zkoreLAIhIYxCIALWKGXMoKpkHCGb36hgp+TVOPfdfI1cS2oI2G pjrhph7Eu/f7kv4vF4Zgu7LWEHbnj+gWVx+kg8uAtyn2oBY79kCsVWK0t3iImubbcFg7 Fi28kDDABM1qrWSXwbdhO6biEflnF/y2NalX3rud+W7ru0F25n/U1O8adIjVKAMpBz5r 37SDlpXe1+gawtlyXS9L7KIvqtVYXBEZmg6NG11xZndw68lTy1HB26ZvrOZRXjSszoNQ FNVpUngO8aiDFv0irVY9Oq3IWt7LbQr4q9OxZwGZ5YfFsv+T6QTpeGk+iyU0sYx2KoZf txzA== X-Received: by 10.180.160.165 with SMTP id xl5mr26118983wib.46.1373149867593; Sat, 06 Jul 2013 15:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.84.235.94] (2.26.90.92.rev.sfr.net. [92.90.26.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f8sm46506639wiv.0.2013.07.06.15.31.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 06 Jul 2013 15:31:07 -0700 (PDT) References: <51D6F1E4.4090001@netfence.it> <669058E9-E663-424E-94A6-29D81757C580@elde.net> <51D7DB83.4060809@netfence.it> <201307061234.41962.mapsware@prodigy.net.mx> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: <201307061234.41962.mapsware@prodigy.net.mx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B144) From: Damien Fleuriot Subject: Re: Possibly OT: NFS vs SMB performance Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 00:29:47 +0200 To: Martin Alejandro Paredes Sanchez X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnmYBZXfRd5sKqJLPxqFKDE3HXQqCziDhu80RBY9GpIMwE0GOEWwNNPwhB4cNkgCIV1whl2 Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 22:31:14 -0000 On 6 Jul 2013, at 21:34, Martin Alejandro Paredes Sanchez wrote: > On Saturday 06 July 2013 01:55:31 Andrea Venturoli wrote: >> On 07/05/13 20:42, Terje Elde wrote: >>> On 5. juli 2013, at 18:18, Andrea Venturoli wrote: >>>> Is this normal in your experience? >>>=20 >>> Did you do them in that order, or did you do the smb (slow) one first? >>>=20 >>> If the slow was first, I'm thinking caching on the server could be a >>> major factor. >>=20 >> Yesterday I did four test: >> _ SMB find resulting in over 10 minutes first time; >> _ SMB find resulting in nearly 10 minutes second time; >> _ NFS find resulting in a little over 1 minute first time; >> _ NFS find resulting in a little less than 1 minute second time. >>=20 >>=20 >> Today I tried again in reverse order: >> _ NFS find took 3 minutes; >> _ NFS find again took 21 seconds; >> _ SMB find took over 9 minutes; >> _ SMB find again took again over 9 minutes. >>=20 >> So, while caching plays a role, it just isn't it. >> The server was possibly doing other things, so the above figures might >> not be that correct; however a difference in the magnitude order is just >> too big (and deterministic) to be considered random noise. >=20 > the problem may be high log level for Samba >=20 > You should read this >=20 > http://www.hob-techtalk.com/2009/03/09/nfs-vs-cifs-aka-smb >=20 Wow wow wow, their numbers with SMB seem super low. They claim to get 80Mb/s NFS vs 7Mb SMB. I'm getting 80-100Mbs with samba here with a core i3, 4gb of RAM and a 12tb r= aidz2 pool on GREEN drives, which are definitely not server grade (replacing= them with WD reds, btw).