On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 4:37 PM Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Feb 8, 2019, at 8:19 AM, Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Current Linux copy tools have various problems compared to other > > platforms - small I/O sizes (and not even configurable for most), > > Hmm, this comment puzzles me, since "cp" already uses s_blksize > returned for the file as the IO size? Not sure if tar/rsync do > the same, but if they don't already use s_blksize they should. We report a block size of 64K in cifs, but I see cp ignoring that and issuing 128K (the code in coreutils is a little hard to follow to see why cp does this), but for long latency networks, larger I/O sizes are preferred. cifs.ko would want at least 4MB typically to be passed down per request since over the wire it negotiates the rsize and wsize (which typically ends up as 1MB or 4MB) and NFS often uses a 1MB rsize/wsize over the wire so similar considerations would apply. -- Thanks, Steve
