Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:30:35 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Geoff Mohler <gemohler@www.speedtoys.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NFS: How to make FreeBSD fall on its face in one easy step Message-ID: <20011213153035.GB56448@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.30.0112130215120.60355-100000@niwun.pair.com> References: <200112130659.fBD6xZt55360@apollo.backplane.com> <Pine.BSF.4.30.0112130215120.60355-100000@niwun.pair.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Dec 13), Mike Silbersack said: > On Wed, 12 Dec 2001, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > Geoff Mohler wrote: > > :Are there any hidden secrets to eeking out more performance from > > :the BSD NFS client (other than version types and the normal fstab > > :tweaks). > > And if you hadn't heard, Matt just fixed a couple of bugs in the tcp > stack which improves NFS greatly. It sounds like after this round of > NFS fixes, the first answer to NFS questions should be: Upgrade to > 4.5! I don't even bother with TCP mounts; my default amd rule says proto=udp. Is there any reason to add the overhead of the TCP stack if you're not leaving your own ethernet? You should be able to easily saturate a 100mbit link with FreeBSD 4.* machines, and I can do 15-20MB/sec with Netgear GA620 gigabit nics (SMP 2 x pIII/600). -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011213153035.GB56448>