From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: RH 7.3 kernels and NFS performance Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:25:36 +0200 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <15697.18944.451371.303514@charged.uio.no> References: <3D513E56.CAF735B6@lmco.com> <200208071105.35128.rdieter@math.unl.edu> <200208071121.04625.rdieter@math.unl.edu> Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from mons.uio.no ([129.240.130.14]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17cTd7-0006Yy-00 for ; Wed, 07 Aug 2002 09:25:49 -0700 To: Rex Dieter In-Reply-To: <200208071121.04625.rdieter@math.unl.edu> Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: >>>>> " " == Rex Dieter writes: > On Wednesday 07 August 2002 11:17 am, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> >>>>> " " == Rex Dieter writes: >> > It depends. I agree that defaulting to 'sync' is not a bug. >> > I do *not* agree that 50k writes is not a bug. >> >> NFSv2 or v3? > I tried primarily v3, but I think I remember testing v2 as > well, with similar results. If you are getting that performance with v3, then it does indeed sound like a bug somewhere. Try with a stock 2.4.19 kernel instead... Cheers, Trond ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs