Re: poor nfs performance

[Rogier Wolff]

Bill Hawes wrote:
> 
> Thomas Pornin wrote:
> > I made some performance tests with nfs on a Linux 2.1.66 PC. I found the
> > following: if the server is a Sun under Solaris, a Linux client is much
> > slower than a SunOS or Solaris client. Reading is ok, but writing does not
> > go above 150 KB/s, whereas a SunOS client will do 300 KB/s and a Solaris one
> > will get close to 900 KB/s (all this is over a standard ethernet network).
> > 
> > If the server is a knfsd on a Linux machine, all is ok (reading and writing
> > at top speed). Is there anything I did wrong, or is the Linux nfs
> > implementation too Linux-specific ? In short, what can I do about it ?
> 
> I'm not sure why you're seeing a server-specific difference in
> performance. Have you experimented with the mount-time rsize and wsize?
> 
> The Linux NFS client doesn't have any special tricks for talking to a
> Linux server; it's intended to work well with any server.
> 
> One thing you might try is to monitor the network and look for
> differences in the Sun-Sun vs Linux-Sun packets.

There is somthing fishy going on with SUNs and NFS performance. About
2 or three years ago, a friend of mine came to the conclusion that
SunOS <-> SunOS and Solaris <-> Solaris worked fine, and that 
SunOS <-> Solaris was very slow. So it seems that Linux adds a third
class to this mess, and is outperformed in some way or another by both 
the Suns.....

(300kb/sec where 900/sec is possible is BAD performance)

					Roger.

-- 
** [e-mail] ** [phone] ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ **
Florida -- A 39 year old construction worker woke up this morning when a
109-car freight train drove over him. According to the police the man was 
drunk. The man himself claims he slipped while walking the dog. 080897