Return-Path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:49480 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752904Ab1DEMUa (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2011 08:20:30 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:20:19 +1000 From: NeilBrown To: Bryan Schumaker Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , Trond Myklebust , Chuck Lever , Linux NFS Mailing List Subject: Re: Use of READDIRPLUS on large directories Message-ID: <20110405222019.6c4d2997@notabene.brown> In-Reply-To: <4D9A26B8.6080504@netapp.com> References: <20110316155528.31913c58@notabene.brown> <24085EE6-EF0B-4F36-8F6A-100AB863F408@oracle.com> <4D80C5C6.2060003@netapp.com> <1300285203.16266.46.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20110317083034.479ecb5f@notabene.brown> <1300311755.30551.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20110317094019.23f31f53@notabene.brown> <20110317171831.GA30180@fieldses.org> <4D9A26B8.6080504@netapp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:14:48 -0400 Bryan Schumaker wrote: > I've done some more testing and posted my initial results here: https://wiki.linux-nfs.org/wiki/index.php/Readdir_performance_results. If anybody has suggestions for better ways to organize the data, please let me know. I'll also try to post some graphs in the next couple of days. I think graphs would certainly help. Also it might be good to be explicit about the server hardware/config as that can make a real performance difference. No bright ideas about how to organise the graphs... I'd probably try just graphing the 'real' time against kernel version with one line for each different directory size. Then you get 16 graphs, 4 different configs (v3/v4 x rddirplus/norddirplus) and 4 different tests (ls -f, ls -lU, ls -U, rm -r... though I can't see how "ls -U" is different from "ls -f"). NeilBrown