On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 12:49:50AM +0800, Roy M. wrote: > Hello, > > We are just using v3 for quite a long time, very stable, performance > are not bad but like many others, want to explore if possible to have > a better throughput. Raw throughput should be the same. And I think the little benchmarking I've seen has found that to be true. If you're just doing big I/O to a few files, that may be all you care about. If you're doing something more complicated then the situation isn't well understood yet. > Seems that are not many benchmark in the web about v4 vs v3 for > performance, etc. Anyone mind sharing some experience? What are the > real advantages in using v4? In theory: if you're doing file locking or reopening files a lot, then you may see a benefit from v4 delegations (which permit the client in some situations to do those operations without telling the server), and I do recall seeing some improvements e.g. with kernel compiles (which tend to reopen a small set of files frequently). --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
