[olug] nfs2 or nfs3?

[Phil Brutsche]

On Wed, 2002-02-20 at 21:15, VincentR wrote:
> It turns out that I am using nfs3.

Ok

> The new system I'm building is only half as fast as the old one when 
> writing data.  It's the same when reading.  The nfs configuration is 
> identical on both systems.

Something *is* odd.  I'm consistently getting 8.6 megabytes/sec writing.

I'm using 2.4.17 + the rmap-11c VM patch.  NFS server has a pair of 40GB
IDE drive connected to a 3ware 6400 RAID controller, and is a 450Mhz PII
w/ 768 MB RAM.

> I've tried optimizing many things in proc.  I've even recompiled the
> kernel with nfs built in and 32K max wsize in .../nfsd/const.h.  I've 
> tried every combination of things, different r/wsizes, mount options, 
> etc...
> The new system should be faster in every aspect.  It has dual P3
> 800Mhz, 1GB Reg./ECC SDRAM, SCSI 160.  The old system (fse) is just a 
> single P3 600, 512MB SDRAM and ide drives.

Neither the memory, nor the disks, are a problem - your working set for
your test can be (and probably is) cached entirely in RAM.  The problem
lies elsewhere...

What lies on the network between the two computers?  I've heard that UDP
packet fragmentation can cause performance problems with NFS.

> I've tested the new one with bonnie and the disks get 79MB throughput,
> so that's not the bottleneck.  The network isn't the problem either,  
> The difference between the two are 2.2.14->2.4.9smp kernel and ext3.  

Ah - it's RedHat.

Have you considered trying 2.4.17 with either the rmap or aa VM patches?


Phil


-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_

For help contact olug-help at bstc.net - run by ezmlm
to unsubscribe, send mail to olug-unsubscribe at bstc.net
or `mail olug-unsubscribe at bstc.net < /dev/null`
(c)2001 OLUG http://www.olug.org

-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_