From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 14 10:35:03 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26482 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:35:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA26477 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:35:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by alpo.whistle.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA07415; Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:28:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) via SMTP by alpo.whistle.com, id smtpdrH7407; Wed Oct 14 17:28:17 1998 Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 10:28:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Mike Smith cc: Brian Feldman , "Alex G. Bulushev" , Daniel Rock , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -current NFS problem In-Reply-To: <199810141604.JAA01077@dingo.cdrom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I thought kirk was doing that.... On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > > Perhaps this could be the problem with NFS "hanging" certain people all > > the time? (not the pine thing) The system spending way too much time > > inside the kernel transmitting NFS packets.... > > No. Lack of ACCESS caching makes us slow and eats the network (because > we are very good at generating/sending/receiving them). > > If there's someone out there that wants to work with the very best NFS > people in the business to sort out our problems, please let me know. > NetApp are keen to see our issues resolved (it will mean less angst > for them in the long run, as they have many FreeBSD-using customers). > > Right now, we are accumulating a bad NFS reputation. 8( > > > Brian Feldman > > > > On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > > > > > > another known problem exist for nfsv3 > > > > > > > > we use www server working over nfs with about 1500000 hits/day > > > > it work fine with nfsv2 (load 0.1 - 0.8), but with nfsv3 > > > > we see load > 130 and server replay is very slow ... > > > > i think this is a bug in fbsd nfsv3 realization, the > > > > same scheme with solaris/sparc nfsv3 client/server work > > > > without this problems ... > > > > > > The problem here is almost certainly that we don't cache the results of > > > ACCESS RPC calls. There's an outstanding request from NetApp for us to > > > address this; their testing indicates that 80% or more of NFS traffic > > > generated by FreeBSD systems consists of ACCESS RPC calls. > > > > > > -- > > > \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith > > > \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au > > > \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org > > > \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > > > > > > > > > -- > \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith > \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au > \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org > \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message