Re: funny idle time from time

[Russell Coker]

On Sat, 1 Sep 2001 12:18, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> I agree with most of what you say, but not with this. You can say a lot
> about NFS, including that it's bad, insecure, to be thrown away and
> changed by CODA or sth else, but not that it's slow.
>
> I've seen data transfers of ~800KByte/s via NFS. Over my 10MBit coax
> network. From a Pentium 166 to a Pentium 133. I don't know any other
> network file serving protocol that can do this.

What other network protocols have you tried?

I have attached the results from running Bonnie++ with my Thinkpad (P3-650,
256M) as an NFS client with both 10 baseT PC-Card and 100baseT CardBus
network cards connected to an Athlon 800 with 256M, PCI 100baseT card and
with a full duplex switch in between.  The only time that NFS is really
efficient is bulk input.

I mounted the NFS share with rsize92,wsize92,nolock.

Both machines run 2.4.9 and the NFS serving is in the kernel.

I tried using smbfs but it dropped out under load (seems to be a bug in the
client code).

I tried making the Thinkpad the NFS server, but it wasn't fast enough and the
client thought that it had fallen off the net and started the laborious
back-off process (which kills performance).


The end result, NFS isn't nearly as fast as it should be, but SMB is worse
because I couldn't get it to work.


Let's redirect this discussion to debian-user...

--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/     Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/       Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/     My home page

Title: Bonnie++ Benchmark results

Version 1.92a			Sequential Output						Sequential Input				Random Seeks				Sequential Create						Random Create
	Size	Chunk Size	Per Char		Block		Rewrite		Per Char		Block				Num Files	Max Size	Create		Read		Delete		Create		Read		Delete
			K/sec	% CPU	K/sec	% CPU	K/sec	% CPU	K/sec	% CPU	K/sec	% CPU	/sec	% CPU			/sec	% CPU	/sec	% CPU	/sec	% CPU	/sec	% CPU	/sec	% CPU	/sec	% CPU
lyta-100-nfs	999367121	496M		546	99	4885	3	2407	2	712	98	10275	3	177.0	1	16		1792	9	4340	16	1924	11	1611	8	5124	15	1454
lyta-100-nfs	Latency		7		16086us		2683ms		457ms		39709us		871ms		Latency		462ms		164ms		12271us		132ms		98528us		728us
lyta-10-nfs	999378658	496M		403	99	884	3	424	4	471	94	1209	0	87.8	4	16		590	14	1127	16	580	11	588	15	1232	19	155
lyta-10-nfs	Latency		3		30693us		1227ms		848ms		52184us		674ms		Latency		774ms		88644us		25376us		114ms		115ms		7331us

1.92a,1.92a,lyta-100-nfs,999367121,496M,,546,99,4885,3,2407,2,712,98,10275,3,177.0,1,16,,,,,1792,9,4340,16,1924,11,1611,8,5124,15,1454,7,16086us,2683ms,457ms,39709us,871ms,462ms,164ms,12271us,132ms,98528us,728us,142ms
1.92a,1.92a,lyta-10-nfs,999378658,496M,,403,99,884,3,424,4,471,94,1209,0,87.8,4,16,,,,,590,14,1127,16,580,11,588,15,1232,19,155,3,30693us,1227ms,848ms,52184us,674ms,774ms,88644us,25376us,114ms,115ms,7331us,139ms