Tom Tucker wrote:
> Maybe this this is a TCP_BACKLOG issue?
>
Hmm, Google does not yield much information about this. I think I know
what that would be, is there a cure or some kernel switches for tuning that?
> BTW, with that many mounts won't you run out of "secure" ports (< 1024),
> so you'll need to use 'insecure' as a mount option.
Not to my knowledge. All connections go to a single port onto the server
box (well, one port per service). Only the clients may run out of
privileged ports of they do too much mounting, but mostly this option is
just for "security" reasons. At least that's my understanding.
By the ways, discussing this issue with my colleague cluster admins, the
question popped up, if there is a guideline/rule of thump of how many
nfsd one should run - or asking the other way round, how to arrive at a
good compromise.
Our server boxes are pretty big (8 cores, 16 GB memory, 16 disk
Areca1261 RAID6), so the resources used by the nfsd are not much of an
issue - I even tested with 1024 nfsd idling around. AT some point
increasing the number does not make much sense because I cannot get the
data out fast enough or the seeks will likely "kill" the box^Wperformance.
Any thoughts on that?
Cheers
Carsten
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
_______________________________________________
Please note that [email protected] is being discontinued.
Please subscribe to [email protected] instead.
http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-nfs