Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:46:15 -0400 From: David Gilbert <dgilbert@dclg.ca> To: Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com> Cc: FreeBSD ISP <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>, David Gilbert <dgilbert@dclg.ca> Subject: Re: NFS optimization Message-ID: <17475.54375.95109.55657@canoe.dclg.ca> In-Reply-To: <cone.1145294815.465429.96480.1000@zoraida.natserv.net> References: <cone.1144794037.918896.59848.1000@zoraida.natserv.net> <17475.43946.264571.52593@canoe.dclg.ca> <cone.1145294815.465429.96480.1000@zoraida.natserv.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> "Francisco" == Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com> writes: Francisco> What would be a good way to determine how many nfsd Francisco> proccesses one should have? I erred in the side of caution Francisco> since had to literally through an NFS setup into production Francisco> without been able to do much testing. Set 35 processes. My Francisco> busiest nfsd are: 250 hours 50 " 24 " 11 " 7 " 4 " 3 " 2 " Francisco> 1 " Francisco> The rest are under 1 hour. Does that mean that I should be Francisco> ok with 10 processes? Roughly, yes. You'll see NFSd's normally decline exponentially with an inflection point. If your machine is completely dedicated to NFS, you probably want to run lots. The overhead of extra NFSd processes is fairly small. If you rarely do NFS, the default of 4 may even be overkill. Consider that if you are "out" of nfsd's, the penalty is increased latency for some small number of transactions that wait for an nfsd to become available.. Even if you have tonnes of NFSd processes, if disk is a limiting factor, more nfsd's won't speed the process. Something that most peoople don't consider is that the number of NFSd process can balance the concurrency of NFS clients against local disk requirements. If, say, you run a busy database on the NFS server, you may want run fewer NFSd process to increase the disk bandwidth resources available to the database. Francisco> To kill the least active ones, I just "kill" them? or is Francisco> there a better way to restart the whole nfs server side? I rarely 'kill' an nfsd. Always thought that was bad. Killing any nfsd is equivalent. If you kill one that is further up the queue, the ones later in the queue move up (AFAIK). Still... I always change the boot parameters and leave the processes currently running when I tune the number of nfsd's. >> trafshow will more quickly give you a handle on the traffic per >> client. Francisco> Thanks much. I see two versions in the port. Trafshow and Francisco> trafshow3. Which one you recommedd? I am currently running version 5.2.3 ... which is pretty fancy. I assume the port without the suffix installs version 5. Both versions will give you the required information, but trafshow 5 is much cooler. Dave. -- ============================================================================ |David Gilbert, Independent Contractor. | Two things can be | |Mail: dave@daveg.ca | equal if and only if they | |http://daveg.ca | are precisely opposite. | =========================================================GLO================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17475.54375.95109.55657>