Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 10:37:39 +0100 From: Bernard Dugas <bernard@dugas-family.org> To: Peter Boosten <peter@boosten.org> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Optimising NFS for system files Message-ID: <495B3D63.2030005@dugas-family.org> In-Reply-To: <B07985F1-A9B7-4F5F-AD44-1E971681199F@boosten.org> References: <20081216094719.EDCEE1065675@hub.freebsd.org> <495930E4.1030501@dugas-family.org> <20081229230115.F68805@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <4959DFEF.5090407@dugas-family.org> <20081230150507.U87347@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <495A3957.9050002@dugas-family.org> <495A3C72.5070802@unsane.co.uk> <20081230201351.L12391@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <495A9595.6080201@dugas-family.org> <20081231002557.D45571@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <495B2516.4020904@dugas-family.org> <B07985F1-A9B7-4F5F-AD44-1E971681199F@boosten.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Boosten wrote: >> On server, it means : 1440MB / 84s = 17MB/s >> On client, that becomes : 1440MB / 266s = 5.4MB/s >> >> I know the disk is not very fast, but i would like the NFS layer not >> to add too much... >> >> I don't want my users to wait between 3 or 4 times more because >> computer is using NFS. > > In my opinion there are more considerations than only nfs: the data is > pulled twice over the network, and the tar process might initiate > paging which is done over the network as well. The tar comparison is > not a good one. I would welcome any way to check that idea on the system. But : - tar is directed to /dev/null so that should avoid any physical writing ; - there is still memory FREE on both server and client while taring ; - the effect of tar is the same on server and client, so the "induced error" should be the same time on both. Thanks a lot, Best regards, -- Bernard DUGAS Mobile +33 615 333 770
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?495B3D63.2030005>