linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: apiszcz@lucidpixels.com
Subject: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:07:02 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601161957300.16829@p34> (raw)

Now that I have 74GB raptors in both of my Linux boxes, I thought I would 
compare throughput between FTP and NFS over a gigabit network.

I am using the same kernel versions and same motherboard on both machines 
and even the same raptor hdd model.

Here are my results:

NFS, COPY 700MB FILE FROM 1 RAPTOR TO ANOTHER RAPTOR VIA GIGABIT ETHERNET:

$ cp file /remote/dst
0.02user 1.86system 0:38.07elapsed 4%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+196minor)pagefaults 0swaps

FTP, SAME

lftp> put file
733045488 bytes transferred in 10 seconds (67.38M/s)

What is wrong with NFS?

NFS options used: rw,bg,hard,intr,nfsvers=3
Is it doing some kind of weird caching?
I am using NFSv3 & XFS as the filesystem, any ideas?

I suppose I should try NFS with TCP, yes?

Thanks!

Justin.

             reply	other threads:[~2006-01-17  1:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-17  1:07 Justin Piszcz [this message]
2006-01-17  1:23 ` Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!? 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
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0601161957300.16829@p34 \
    --to=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=apiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).