From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 17 10:12:48 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 844B616A406 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:12:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bdonnell@gmail.com) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.235]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A36113C4BE for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:12:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bdonnell@gmail.com) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i23so750596wra for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 03:12:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=GTYNqWdRkMioOZgkBqT61FOBaLM5+DCQUPdh81gJRcy43VQFtR2kYvw1vhmG1fwX/I8ZxCpgHYZhfzqgxOgJKiKUZeM65vWxyEdJ0v9M7KKsEAk8kVUD8Cd3g6MIw3ALQRZAIxN3FCzuy6pwHNrghf1UUUrqWFoGSbwO841ImS0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=TetIbMECiO1vX+/r6cc5ZIlfFj3hJNQjT5QGr4OLtizmEBSxgc7jlHZCDfq2O0l1PenqjH4B5KdXaIEH9j2UVMMhYK1MFnyLe+DLPqBE88KgeNrH81q6rqkDF0Z3S2ghI2UaDHuvtCzDFMeZI1yIU9ngHXCMIjIXSy4TQgaMXyk= Received: by 10.143.33.19 with SMTP id l19mr21095wfj.1184667166846; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 03:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.77.9 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 03:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1c5c32890707170312r71f3735at958325a08db0f1c3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 06:12:46 -0400 From: "Brian Donnell" To: "Steven Schlansker" In-Reply-To: <469C48F2.7000302@berkeley.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2978EDA9-D393-434C-B734-2DE188631761@berkeley.edu> <469C3900.5020703@berkeley.edu> <1c5c32890707162045u9d56cfeq2f7430ddddd55418@mail.gmail.com> <469C48F2.7000302@berkeley.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Strange performance characteristics with ZFS X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:12:48 -0000 That was my fault, I misread what you had said your configuration was. The problem I ran into was the same as you're seeing with the system waiting on ZFS causing the NFS client to hang and everything becoming unresponsive. The ls script should be running on the ZFS machine and executing ls on the ZFS directory. If you have a smaller file to try with first I'd recommend it. 30GB of corrupt data is just pain. To be honest, I gave up on NFS with ZFS and started using Samba for everything after compiling samba3 without a couple functions (check the ZFS vs Samba debugging results thread from earlier this month) as it actually maxes out a 100Mbit network link for the transfer. That's something I could never get NFS with ZFS to come close to doing. Just to be sure, since you're using nfsd, that means you have the sharenfs option of the zfs pool turned off? -- Brian On 7/17/07, Steven Schlansker wrote: > > That turned out to be a particularly bad idea. As soon as I executed > that on the server, the client's cpu pegged! Despite the fact that > there is about 5MB/s transfer over the network, the client is no longer > making any progress on the copy. The nfsd processes on the bsd server > are still happily chugging away serving data in the same fits and bursts > as before, but the linux machine receiving the data doesn't seem to be > doing anything with it. I restarted the nfsd and mountd processes, > I'll let it run for a bit... > > Aha. It corrupted data. Now I have to start the copy over again :/ > > This is not good! Anything else I can try? (Hopefully without making > the process fail :-p ) > > Thanks! > > Brian Donnell wrote: > > When I was experimenting with ZFS over NFS I had similar experiences. > > Do me a favor and try something that sounds a little out there. On a > > shell on the ZFS machine set up a looping script that executes an ls on > > the directory you're writing the file to once every second and watch > > your transfer rates. I noticed a marked improvement, but I could never > > determine if it was ZFS or the client NFS implementation. > > > > -- Brian > > > >