Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:04:41 +0200 From: Gerrit =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=FChn?= <gerrit.kuehn@aei.mpg.de> To: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Subject: Re: dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate Message-ID: <20150825160441.48ed35049f5947f0dbbaa801@aei.mpg.de> In-Reply-To: <202540715.30987815.1440503749374.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca> References: <20150824192926.GL3158@zxy.spb.ru> <20150825095448.53458554a4ee7f96129a2d70@aei.mpg.de> <202540715.30987815.1440503749374.JavaMail.zimbra@uoguelph.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 07:55:49 -0400 (EDT) Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote about Re: dev.ix.0.queueX.interrupt_rate: RM> If you have tso enabled, you could try this patch: RM> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3477 RM> RM> If TSO is disabled, then we don't have an explanation for poor NFS RM> performance yet. I tried both with or without TSO, and it does not appear to make any difference for me. I get about 50MB/s net write speed and about 200MB/s read. Even my 1GBE interface perform better in terms of writing. RM> If you haven't seen it, you might want to keep an eye RM> on this thread: http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55DC1B5A.8010109 Yes, I am watching this. Thanks for the pointer. cu Gerrit
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150825160441.48ed35049f5947f0dbbaa801>