On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:03:08PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote: > Thank you for the update. I guess I don’t see how the proposed NFS > implementation is complicated and ugly (but I’m biased). I’ll try to > give you some performance number. My 1 data point (1gb) inter copy > showed 30% improvement (how can that be ignored). That would be useful, thanks--if it comes with some details about the setup. I'm not so curious about percent improvement, as how to predict the performance on a given network. If server-to-server copy looks like it's normally able to use close to the available bandwidth between the two servers, and if a traditional read-write-copy loop is similarly able to use the available bandwidth, then I can figure out whether server-to-server copy will help on my setup. --b.
