From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: NFS Performance Between SGI Servers and Linux Clients Date: 22 May 2003 23:12:57 +0200 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: <008601c3207f$b8bfd160$0b00430a@granger> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Return-path: Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 19IxN4-00044M-00 for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 14:13:06 -0700 To: "Iain Irwin-Powell" In-Reply-To: <008601c3207f$b8bfd160$0b00430a@granger> 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: >>>>> " " == Iain Irwin-Powell writes: > 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. ... and this is a problem because .... ??? The Linux client tries to read ahead as much as it can and as quickly as it can. Why should it doing anything else? Cheers, Trond ------------------------------------------------------- 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