From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Cc: "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 14:03:36 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601171402230.25508@p34> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1137524502.7855.107.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
The file is 700MB.
Machine A (src) has 2GB of RAM / 2GB of swap
Machine B (dst) has 1GB of RAM / 2GB of swap.
Justin.
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:55 -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>> Did you get my other e-mail?
>>
>> $ cp file /nfs/destination
>> $ lftp> put file
>
>
> Yes, but how big a file is this? Is it significantly larger than the
> amount of cache memory on the server? As I said, if ftp is failing to
> sync the file to disk, then you may be comparing apples and oranges.
>
> Cheers,
> Trond
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 13:38 -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>>> Writing from SRC(A) -> DST(B).
>>>> I have not tested reading, but as I recall there were similar speed issues
>>>> going the other way too, although I have not tested it recently.
>>>
>>> How were you testing it? I'm not sure that ftp will actually sync your
>>> file to disk (whereas that is pretty much mandatory for an NFS server),
>>> so unless you are transferring very large files, you would expect to see
>>> a speed difference due to caching of writes by the server.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Trond
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-17 19:03 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 [this message]
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.4.64.0601171402230.25508@p34 \
--to=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=apiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=kernel@linuxace.com \
--cc=kloczek@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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).