From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 20 18:35:36 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA9016A401 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:35:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mail-out4.apple.com (mail-out4.apple.com [17.254.13.23]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F015913C4F2 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:35:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from relay11.apple.com (relay11.apple.com [17.128.113.48]) by mail-out4.apple.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBDB122CB07D; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:35:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay11.apple.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by relay11.apple.com (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id D563228091; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:35:35 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 11807130-a8442bb0000028a7-e4-47bc72f70bea Received: from cswiger1.apple.com (cswiger1.apple.com [17.214.13.96]) by relay11.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with ESMTP id BDFCF28093; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:35:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <9BCE1D41-EC1A-4FE6-8551-E725DBE5D3A8@mac.com> From: Chuck Swiger To: Valerio Daelli In-Reply-To: <27dbfc8c0802200323r13f69905l4940d0d5accd1eb1@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:35:35 -0800 References: <27dbfc8c0802190243y113d3059yd0c602850a4dbd6b@mail.gmail.com> <47BB33AD.1050005@FreeBSD.org> <27dbfc8c0802200323r13f69905l4940d0d5accd1eb1@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: "freebsd-performance@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Bad performance of 7.0 nfs client with Solaris nfs server 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: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:35:36 -0000 Hi-- On Feb 20, 2008, at 3:23 AM, Valerio Daelli wrote: > 99904 total packets received [ ... ] > > 61441 fragments received [ ... ] > 34819 output datagrams fragmented > 208914 fragments created Take a look at the level of packet fragmentation you are encountering; yes, this is expected and things will work but there is extra latency added when the IP stack has to reassemble packets before the data can be delivered. Try setting the NFS rsize/wsize to 1024 or perhaps 1400 and see whether that improves performance. Or, if your switch and NICs support it, see whether you can get Gb Ethernet jumbo frames working so that you don't have to fragment for 2K or 4K data packets.... -- -Chuck