Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Aug 1995 11:01:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:      "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com>
To:        cmsedore@mailbox.syr.edu (Christopher Sedore)
Cc:        hasty@rah.star-gate.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Making a FreeBSD NFS server
Message-ID:  <199508231801.LAA09795@gndrsh.aac.dev.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950823091036.2184B-100000@rodan.syr.edu> from "Christopher Sedore" at Aug 23, 95 10:49:07 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> 
> 
> The Network Computing article test were done over FDDI.  I got ~3MB/sec 
> write and ~2MB/sec read while doing the tests.
> 
> Note that the ~2MB/sec read was from a disk which only yielded ~2MB/sec
> when using IOZone locally, so a 7200 rpm drive may make the number go up.

Even a reasonable 5400RPM drive will do 4MB/s, and I have seen some in
the 5.7MB/s class.

> As I understand some of the NFS protocol issues, you probably won't see
> more than ~2MB/sec read from a single process anyway, so you'd have to use
> multiple IOZones or whatever other benchmark you use to break that barrier.

I have seen in excess of 3.5MB/s over 100baseTX using a single copy
of iozone to a single disk.

...
> On Tue, 22 Aug 1995, Amancio Hasty Jr. wrote:
> 
> > >>> Brian Tao said:
> >  > On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, Amancio Hasty Jr. wrote:
> >  > > 
> >  > > Curious then, where is the time being spend in the NFS code?
> >  > > 
> >  > > Given that we can drive the ethernet at near capacity and that the
> >  > > disks are very fast . It pretty much leads me to believe that
> >  > > the NFS code or protocol is the bottle neck.
> >  > 
> >  >     Are you talking about the case of synchronous writes to a FreeBSD
> >  > NFS server?  I don't expect the bandwidth in the other cases to climb
> >  > any higher (already in the 800K/sec to 900K/sec range over 10Mbps
> >  > Ethernet).
> >  
> > 
> > Should be interesting to find out the NFS performance numbers with
> > your configuration using fast ethernet. 

Mine are in the 2 to 3.5MB/s range using 4MB/s disk drives and 100BaseTx.
I suspect this would go up if I was using 6 or 7MB/s drives.

Also routing performance on 100BaseTx is not what I had though it was,
it is much better and I have measured 5 to 6MB/s using ttcp through a
100Mhz async cache Pentium, suspect it would be much better with sync
burst cache as the machine was quite memory bandwidth bound when running
the tests.

> > If they are very high, I suggest sending the performance figures to
> > Networking Computing 8)

:-).

> > 	Amancio


-- 
Rod Grimes                                      rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com
Accurate Automation Company                 Reliable computers for FreeBSD



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199508231801.LAA09795>