From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 2 21:05:45 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0286F5A7 for ; Thu, 2 May 2013 21:05:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.208.146]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C444C15CD for ; Thu, 2 May 2013 21:05:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.151.188]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7911B1F8AE2B; Thu, 2 May 2013 18:05:43 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.208.146]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.151.188]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30340-10; Thu, 2 May 2013 21:05:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.5.250.150] (remote.ilcs.sd63.bc.ca [142.31.148.2]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A097F1F8AE2A; Thu, 2 May 2013 18:05:40 -0300 (ADT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Subject: Re: NFS Performance issue against NetApp From: "Marc G. Fournier" In-Reply-To: <834305228.13772274.1367527941142.JavaMail.root@k-state.edu> Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:05:38 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <75CB6F1E-385D-4E51-876E-7BB8D7140263@hub.org> References: <834305228.13772274.1367527941142.JavaMail.root@k-state.edu> To: "Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng." X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 21:05:45 -0000 On 2013-05-02, at 13:52 , "Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng." = wrote: > Yeah, I didn't have any problems with FreeBSD 9.0 on G7, the boss = didn't like the lack of passthru and having to configure a bunch of raid = 0 luns for each disk with the SmartArray P410i...so he was going through = everything putting in the LSI SAS 2008s, and decided while he was at it = to switch to all Intel EXPI9402PT cards....it might be because of the = G7's that are doing SmartOS. He swapped out all the memory=85. =20 I tried Intel vs Broadcom, and didn't notice any difference =85 New NFS = is slower then Old NFS, but that's just a difference of a 5m start up vs = a 4m start up =85 even OpenBSD is faster by ~25% "out of the box" =85 The thing is, I'm not convinced it is a NFS related issue =85 there are = *so* many other variables involved =85 it could be something with the = network stack =85 it could be something with the scheduler =85 it could = be =85 hell, it could be like the guy states in that blog posting = (http://antibsd.wordpress.com/) and be the compiler changes =85=20 I found this in my searches that talks about how much CPU on the NetAPP = side is used when using a FreeBSD client over Linux: = http://www.makingitscale.com/2012/freebsd-linux-nfs-and-the-attribute-cach= e.html My big question is why is Linux so much less aggressive then FreeBSD in = this guys tests? Is the Linux implementation "skipping" something in = their processing? Are we doing something that is "optional", but for = completeness, we've implemented it while they've chosen to leave it out? There has to be something to explain such dramatic differences =85 :( >=20 > Joked that he was replacing everything except for the case.... >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- >>=20 >> Am 24.04.2013 um 23:29 schrieb "Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng." >> : >>=20 >>> Hmmm, I guess all our Gen8's have been for the new vCloud project. >>> But, a few months ago boss had gone to putting LSI SAS 2008 and >>> Intel EXPI9402PT cards into our other Proliants (DL380 G7's and >>> DL180 G6's). Currently the only in production FreeBSD server >>> (9.1) is on a DL180 G6. I was working on a DL380 G7, but I lost >>> that hardware to a different project. >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> G6 and G7 is no problem. At least DL360 + DL380, which we use >> (almost) exclusively. >> The onboard-NICs are supposed to be swappable for something else - >> but there aren't any useful modules yet (a 10G module is available). >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20