From: Jason Holmes Subject: Re: 2.4 vs. 2.6 nfs client performance Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 10:54:23 -0500 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <3FB79DAF.8E483BD5@psu.edu> References: <3FB27670.4C878A84@psu.edu> <3FB29D43.A618973D@psu.edu> <16306.41898.291062.36209@charged.uio.no> <3FB2A738.3F2C90B8@psu.edu> <16306.49310.195265.145519@charged.uio.no> <3FB2DC60.FA7D3E08@psu.edu> <16306.59249.857512.354675@charged.uio.no> <3FB3924B.7450E9F7@psu.edu> <3FB3FDE8.47E819FF@psu.edu> <16308.8254.89284.377113@charged.uio.no> <3FB520E4.133AF7DB@psu.edu> <16309.17670.931812.401791@charged.uio.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Cipher TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 1ALPFU-0007hj-00 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:55:40 -0800 Received: from vpn-19-8.aset.psu.edu ([146.186.19.8] helo=funkmachine.cac.psu.edu) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1ALPEp-00010O-IT for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 16 Nov 2003 07:54:59 -0800 To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no 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: Trond Myklebust wrote: > > >>>>> " " == Jason Holmes writes: > > > Files should be up there (http://magicbus.cac.psu.edu/nfs). I > > do have to admit that something odd is going on - 2.4.22 still > > is faster than 2.6.0-test9-bk17 and test9-bk17 is still showing > > the large amount of commits, but both of them are running > > faster than they did before on the sync mounts and I'm not sure > > what I might have changed to cause this. > > Hmm... It looks like you are doing a succession of 4k commits. I'll > bet the read() code is involved in this... > > Could you try the following patch and see if it improves things? That made a huge difference: Client nfs v3: null getattr setattr lookup access readlink 0 0% 714 0% 0 0% 110 0% 204 0% 0 0% read write create mkdir symlink mknod 873 0% 178571 92% 24 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% remove rmdir rename link readdir readdirplus 24 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 18 0% 0 0% fsstat fsinfo pathconf commit 0 0% 3 0% 0 0% 13175 6% Client rpc stats: calls retrans authrefrsh 193716 13 0 It also cut the job time in about half. I put a level9 log of it up with the other ones. I'll have to rerun the 2.4 vs. this, but I think that this change makes the 2.6 client faster than the 2.4 for this case. Thanks, -- Jason Holmes ------------------------------------------------------- This SF. Net email is sponsored by: GoToMyPC GoToMyPC is the fast, easy and secure way to access your computer from any Web browser or wireless device. Click here to Try it Free! https://www.gotomypc.com/tr/OSDN/AW/Q4_2003/t/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs