Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:63373 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754613Ab2BVKRr (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2012 05:17:47 -0500 Received: from tang.cn.fujitsu.com (tang.cn.fujitsu.com [10.167.250.3]) by song.cn.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E6917013C for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:17:46 +0800 (CST) Received: from mailserver.fnst.cn.fujitsu.com (tang.cn.fujitsu.com [127.0.0.1]) by tang.cn.fujitsu.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q1MAHjAI001726 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:17:45 +0800 Message-ID: <4F44C071.8010104@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:16:17 +0800 From: Fu Liankun MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: spnfs write performance issue Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: When copy a big file(about 500MB) to nfs server using pnfs, it cost obvious longer time as compared with NFSv3 or NFSv4 protocol. PNFS cost about 300-550s NFSv3 cost about 49s NFSv4 cost about 49s My test environment as following: MDS: 3.1.0-rc8-pnfs ipaddr1: 192.168.0.100, ipaddr2:192.168.1.100 DS1: 3.1.0-rc8-pnfs ipaddr1: 192.168.0.101, ipaddr2:192.168.1.101 DS2: 3.1.0-rc8-pnfs ipaddr1: 192.168.0.102, ipaddr2:192.168.1.102 client: RHEL6.2GA(2.6.32-220.el6.i686) ipaddr1: 192.168.0.19, ipaddr2:192.168.1.19 192.168.1.100 <-------- NFS4.1 connection --------->192.168.1.101 192.168.0.100 <-------- NFS4.1 connection --------->192.168.0.102 192.168.0.19 <-------- NFS4.1 connection --------->192.168.0.100 Dunring the write process, the client output the message: FS-Cache: Loaded FS-Cache: Netfs 'nfs' registered for caching nfs4filelayout_init: NFSv4 File Layout Driver Registering... nfs: server 192.168.1.101 not responding, timed out The message "nfs: server 192.168.1.101 not responding, timed out" was output during the COMMIT request. Who can tell me the reason why pnfs cost so long time.