From: "Jocky Wilson" Subject: Re: rsize, wsize > 32Kb : how? Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:02:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1102636343.3784.27.camel@tesuji.nac.uci.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed 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-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1CcYGO-00042H-Sk for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:04:00 -0800 Received: from bay21-f9.bay21.hotmail.com ([65.54.233.98] helo=hotmail.com) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CcYGO-0001ye-KE for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:04:00 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1102636343.3784.27.camel@tesuji.nac.uci.edu> To: strombrg@dcs.nac.uci.edu Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net 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: No, my LAN is fast ethernet and the NAS and PCs are in 100 full duplex. My streaming client even has a 10mb half duplex nic. I noticed a consistent write performance increase when changing wsize from 8192->16384->32768 I did increase rmem and wmem values from 32767 (yes) to 65536, which doesn't seem to make a difference. JockyW >From: Dan Stromberg >Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 15:52:23 -0800 > > >Is it safe to assume you've enabled jumbo frames? > >Without jumbo frames, a huge packet size isn't necessarily going to make >things faster... > ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs