From: "Iain Irwin-Powell" Subject: NFS Performance Between SGI Servers and Linux Clients Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 17:32:22 +0100 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <008601c3207f$b8bfd160$0b00430a@granger> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Received: from scanman.cinesite.co.uk ([193.203.81.129]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 19It3A-00023m-00 for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 09:36:16 -0700 Received: from sirius.cinesite.co.uk (sirius.cinesite.co.uk [10.66.0.23]) by scanman.cinesite.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA17330 for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 17:35:43 +0100 (BST) Received: from sirius (sirius.cinesite.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) by sirius.cinesite.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 349A4BFFC for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 17:35:43 +0100 (BST) Received: from granger (shirley.cinesite.co.uk [10.65.1.5]) by sirius.cinesite.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C234BFFB for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 17:35:42 +0100 (BST) To: 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: Does anyone have any ideas about this? We have been experiencing a number of issues regarding NFS serving on SGI IRIX (6.5.19) servers which now appear to point back to Linux NFS clients. The server is an Origin 2000, quad processors, 1.5GB memory, serving over Gigabit. This can be reproduced on connections whether or not they are using jumbo frames. The disks that are served are hardware RAID3 capable of around 80-90MB/s (tested and optimised not theoretical). Under certain circumstances will get a load average of 8 (or how ever many nfsd's are running). The server itself is not that busy. Most of the nfsd's show as sleeping but they are obviously waiting for something. Further investigation revealed that this situation arises when a Linux client opens many files in quick succession (doing open-read-close,open-read-close). We tend to use files in the range 3MB-13MB in size generally. If we do the same test on an SGI client there is very little impact on the load average. We can recreate this by doing (on the client); find . -type -f -print -exec grep jsdhgkhjfdk {} \; The same effect appears to happen on Linux servers as well. A single Linux client doing this will make the load average creep up towards 2.5. Linux Version 2.4.20 nfs-utils-1.0.1-1 exports are exported with -32bitclients Looking a bit deeper in a packet trace when the grep is running, Linux seems to issue 16 read requests (16KB) at a time whilst an SGI will only issue between 2 and 4. May or may not be relevant. This information has also been passed back to SGI who are looking at it. Packet traces and more detail is available if anyone wants them. Any ideas or suggestions would be welcome. ****************************************************************** Iain Irwin-Powell (AKA Iain Powell) Senior Systems Administrator Cinesite Europe Limited 9 Carlisle Street London W1D 3BP T: +442079734000 DDI: +442079734053 ******************************************************************* It's not broken, it just doesn't work the way you expected. ******************************************************************* ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your application fit in a relational database is painful, don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. Now part of Progress Software. http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs