On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 02:37:51PM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 09/03/2009 02:15 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 02:37:31PM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: >> >>> Please keep in mind that the NFS stable storage requirements are >>> probably causing a significant slowdown in activities such as this. >>> >> My first thought too, but: >> >> >>> Jason Legate wrote: >>> >>>> When I run our creation benchmark locally I can get around 3000 >>>> files/ second in the configuration we're using now, but only around >>>> 300/second over NFS. It's mounted as this: >>>> >> ... >> >>>> When I mount the same FS over localhost instead of across the lan, >>>> it performs about full speed (the 3000/sec). >>>> >> The localhost NFS mount would be incurring the same sync latency, so all >> his latency must be due to network. (And with those numbers I guess >> he's either got lots of disk spindles, or an ssd, or (uh-oh) has the >> async option set?) >> >> --b. >> > > For small files without doing an fsync per file, getting 3000 files/sec > is not that much. Ext3 can do it with a local s-ata disk. I suspect that > Jason would run much slower if he ran with local fsync()'s enabled > (similar to what NFS servers have to do). Yeah, which is why I was suspecting they set "async" on the export. In which case I hope they know what they're doing.... --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
