From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Dickson Subject: Re: nfsstat --sleep=# Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:18:30 -0400 Message-ID: <49BE7BD6.3050303@RedHat.com> References: <49B86744.6060105@disney.com> <20090312155055.GB2081@fieldses.org> <65B488F7-A902-4126-8E05-65622991D78C@oracle.com> <20090312162459.GC2081@fieldses.org> <49B93C10.5020208@disney.com> <20090312164818.GF2081@fieldses.org> <82886FA0-DF61-4979-B914-3CC59BAA2493@oracle.com> <20090312193210.GA7530@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" , Kevin Constantine , Linux NFS Mailing List To: Chuck Lever Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:50629 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751703AbZCPQVT (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:21:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Chuck Lever wrote: > On Mar 12, 2009, at Mar 12, 2009, 3:32 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 01:22:32PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >>> Actually I would rather see the performance metrics scripts improved. >>> These tools give a lot more information than nfsstat ever will be able >>> to. >> >> Probably so, but those scripts are a bit hard to find, aren't they? >> >> We should >> - get distributions to install them by default >> - write man pages? >> - add references to them where possible (from the nfsstat man >> page, from howto's/faq's/?) > > Steve promised me Red Hat would take care of this when these were added > to nfs-utils last year. Not sure what I exactly promised (that's usually not my style 8-) ) but those scripts definitely fell off my radar... > >> Until then, unfortunately, improvements to nfsstat are more useful, >> since nfsstat is the thing people are more likely to run across. > > Again, I think improving nfsstat at this point (which is merely for > compatibility with Solaris) would be wasted work, if we already have > what is needed in another tool. The Python tools are much more > sophisticated, and it would be confusing to add their functionality to > nfsstat (e.g. why can I zero the legacy stats with the -z option, but > not the stats the come from /proc/self/mountstats?). > > Let's spend the effort on the tools that give us deeper results. I have to agree... I truly think there is a wealth of untapped information in those mountstats... Just waiting for someone to dip them out... steved.