From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 2 12:31:30 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A64016A469 for ; Sat, 2 Jun 2007 12:31:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.69.75]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D064F13C45B for ; Sat, 2 Jun 2007 12:31:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 8724 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Jun 2007 12:31:29 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=SCzJYeAbTCIc0b2L//fNByNj1Q9BR/43+DQDJgiJ9oy00YEVZeZvvqhErcjbyqaKCCHLZ5CachvN/DtwZWsGxrwsWQvkN+xYBRPQg9qt44HtktOdx2RA7efr6+QEjpc3gOB9J2OoX4YD3oEvzCVkrIT/xMKOjGaVG0qwMYh1cO4=; X-YMail-OSG: 3BfdspIVM1lBUQahDzTi9FIHwO4lFxjhcQN.QqDT5JjK.91A4kDYAN4I3DmqGGCnff.8mGxBF39pHRVUbji6prQOoWXrkSkinOmEOxWajwj.7zKOauQIcxHyh6Uksw-- Received: from [77.129.177.243] by web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 02 Jun 2007 05:31:29 PDT Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 05:31:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Arne "Wörner" To: hshh In-Reply-To: <9b6b59500706020513x49cf8aecucf8393a98e478221@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <365881.7988.qm@web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bad performance while transfer large block size through NFS. X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 12:31:30 -0000 > I set up one NFS server, and mounted on other server by TCP. Servers > connected with Giga network, and running 6.2-RELEASE. > > But I found the performance is very bad while transfering large block > size data. > I dont know if it makes any sense, but at least the following experiment might be fun: 1. With various block sizes (e. g. 32k, 128k, 1m, 2m) on the client box: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null bs=XXX count=1k 2. With various block sizes (e. g. 32k, 128k, 1m, 2m) on the client box: dd if=/dev/zero bs=XXX count=1k | dd of=/path/to/nfs/mount bs=32k 3. With various block sizes (e. g. 32k, 128k, 1m, 2m) on the client box: dd if=/dev/zero bs=XXX count=1k | dd of=/dev/null bs=32k The idea would be, that possibly the client box has problems, when it has to handle big data blocks inside the kernel (in that case part 1 would show the same performance degradation as ur initial test). -Arne ____________________________________________________________________________________ The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php