From: trmcneal@comcast.net Subject: RE: NFS sync write performance Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 22:06:07 +0000 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <022420042206.18531.7c5a@comcast.net> Cc: "Alex Wun" , Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.12] helo=sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1Avkho-0008IH-U2 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 14:07:08 -0800 Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.198.39]) by sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1AvkUW-0001i6-R5 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 13:53:24 -0800 To: "Lever, Charles" Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: I haven't done any measurements in a long time, but I'd think the differential between sync and async V3 would be minor in general. Well, with the buffer size limits, it *is* significant, and HPUX definitely got a big boost when they (well, it was we at the time) went from 8k to 32K buffer sizes, but its nowhere near the differential between sync and async V2. Has anyone figured out some general numbers? Regards - Tom -- Tom McNeal (650)906-0761(cell) (650)964-8459(fax) ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs