xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: NFS performance - more info

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: NFS performance - more info
From: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 4 Mar 2001 09:12:49 GMT
Distribution: local
Organization: innominate AG, Berlin, Germany
References: <200103040726.HAA23413@groucho.maths.monash.edu.au>
Reply-to: Thomas Graichen <thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: tin/1.4.4-20000803 ("Vet for the Insane") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.2-XFS (i686))
Robin Humble <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> However, (and I guess you knew this was coming :-) I tried writing to
> an XFS partition over NFS again - this time using work machines
> instead of home, and the performance was a still a bit of a worry
> to say the least.
> ...
> machine/config this time:
> dual celeron 500, ASUS bp6, 512M ram, 4x maxtor 60G/7200rpm drives,
> 2x promise ultra100 controller cards (each drive on its own controller),
> RH7.1beta, 2.4.2-XFSsmp-3mar2001 kernel. The network is 100Mbit
> ethernet (3c905 I think). Reiserfs was not timed as it was unable to
> make >2G files(!!)

> time dd if=/dev/zero of=bigFile bs=1024k count=2500

>             writes to local disk   writes over nfs   notes
> xfs                16 MB/s            0.7 MB/s    load ~90-100% per cpu + (*)
> xfs over RAID0     37 MB/s             1  MB/s       ""
> xfs over RAID5            didn't try yet
> ext2               17 MB/s             8  MB/s    load ~30-40% per cpu
> ext2 over RAID0    38 MB/s             8  MB/s       ""
> ext2 over RAID5    14 MB/s             6  MB/s       "" + (**)

i just did a very simple test on the setup i can us right now from
remote and end up at about 2mb/sec (server: up 333mhz pII, 128mb,
6gb udma2 disk - so - no big hardware, ah - i forgot: k6-2/400, 64mb
solaris8 ix86 client) - looks like something is definitely not ok
with your setup (otherwise i would not get better results with my
much slower hardware) - so - some things to try:

* did you try kiocluster's (only work with ide or scsi not with md
  or lvm) - no idea if it might help -> mount -o kiocluster ...
* the other good lines posted often here (but i don't think they
  will help here) -> mount -o logbufs=4,logbsize=32768 ...
* creating the filesystem with a bigger journal is also a good idea
  for real workload (ok - i think not in this case too - because
  here is not much metadata to journal :-)
  -> mkfs -t xfs -l size=32768b ...
* did you try the same with an up kernel? - maybe some smp locking
  thing somethere

t

-- 
thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                                                         innominate AG
                                                  the linux architects
tel: +49-30-308806-13   fax: -77             http://www.innominate.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>