Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:14:44 +0200
From:      Claus Guttesen <kometen@gmail.com>
To:        Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com>
Cc:        freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: some simple nfs-benchmarks on 5.4 RC2
Message-ID:  <b41c755205041906145fc4719c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4264F8A8.3080405@centtech.com>
References:  <b41c75520504190418308f94cc@mail.gmail.com> <4264EC60.3020600@centtech.com> <b41c75520504190443187617de@mail.gmail.com> <4264EF40.3060900@centtech.com> <b41c75520504190455542071f7@mail.gmail.com> <4264F8A8.3080405@centtech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> What does gstat look like on the server when you are doing this?
> Also - does a dd locally on the server give the same results?  You should=
 get
> about double that I would estimate locally direct to disk.  What about a =
dd over
> NFS?

dd-command:

dd if=3D/dev/zero of=3D/nfssrv/dd.tst bs=3D1024 count=3D1048576

on client:
1073741824 bytes transferred in 24.787112 secs (43318553 bytes/sec)
gstat showed approx. 30.000-52.000 KB/s.

on nfs-server:
1073741824 bytes transferred in 23.368815 secs (45947637 bytes/sec)
gstat showed approx. 45.000-46.000 KB/s.

The funny thing is that the outputrate fluxuates more dd'ing from the
client (remote) and is more consistent dd'ing on the server (locally).

> What is the server spending its time doing? (top?)

nfsd.

> If you are looking for the best performance, you might try a RAID 0+1 (or=
 10
> possibly) instead of RAID 5.

I chosed raid 5 to maximize space.

regards
Claus



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b41c755205041906145fc4719c>