From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
Cc: "Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>,
"Alan Cox" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Tomasz Kłoczko" <kloczek@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>,
"Phil Oester" <kernel@linuxace.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, apiszcz@lucidpixels.com
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:43:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1137544994.7855.234.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1137541179.3587.10.camel@mindpipe>
On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 18:39 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 18:19 -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> > man mount
> >
>
> async is the default for most filesystems but the NFS standard requires
> writes to be synchronous.
On the server side, note. Not the client side. Justin appears to be
looking at the client, whereas you are referring to an export option on
the server.
The client only guarantees that writes must have been committed to disk
on the server when either fsync() or close() have been called.
Cheers,
Trond
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-18 0:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-17 1:07 Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!? Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 1:23 ` Phil Oester
2006-01-17 1:32 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 17:48 ` Tomasz Kłoczko
2006-01-17 18:11 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-17 18:24 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 18:33 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-17 18:37 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-01-17 18:38 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 18:53 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-01-17 18:55 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 19:01 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-01-17 19:03 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 20:39 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-17 20:45 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 22:07 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-17 22:13 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-17 23:19 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 23:39 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-18 0:43 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2006-01-17 9:50 ` Justin Piszcz
2006-01-17 17:10 ` Jan Engelhardt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1137544994.7855.234.camel@lade.trondhjem.org \
--to=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=apiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
--cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=kernel@linuxace.com \
--cc=kloczek@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).