From: raven@themaw.net Subject: Re: Performance udp vs. tcp Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:49:27 +0800 (WST) Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: <4129BF94.20902@bio.ifi.lmu.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net 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 1BzGF5-00061F-Hj for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:56:15 -0700 Received: from wombat.indigo.net.au ([202.0.185.19]) by sc8-sf-mx2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1BzGF2-0004zS-E4 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:56:15 -0700 To: Frank Steiner In-Reply-To: <4129BF94.20902@bio.ifi.lmu.de> 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: On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Frank Steiner wrote: > I was very amazed by this, but I guess this could be caused by our network, > which is a fully switched "100mbit for client/1gbit for servers" network, > so we have almost no packet loss. I don't know why you are so suprised. TCP has somewhat more protocol overhead than UDP. So on a solid network it should be faster. You can use larger packets with TCP than you can with UDP which can offset the overhead some. Ian ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media 100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33 Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift. http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs