xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: nfs3 problems w/xfs?

To: Gary Orser <orser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: nfs3 problems w/xfs?
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:28:11 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: Tad Dolphay <tbd@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.SGI.4.10.10108291509270.22087-100000@case.cns.montana.edu>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Gary Orser wrote:

> Tad,
> 
> Hmm, It looks like nfs3 wasn't working.
> 
> I upgraded to 4.5.9, with the 4.5.9-xfs patches
> and now nfs3 works ok, however:
> (must have been the version of nfs-utils)
> 
> I just copied a large file from the sgi server to this linux box
> (512m 1.4g Athlon) and the box got buried.
> 
> Over a 100mb switched line a 3G file took 26 minutes, ok not spectacular.
> 
> Load average was over 7, system cpu % was over 85%.
> 
> The single processor on the origin 2000 (r10000) running nfsd was barely
> turning over.
> 
> Terminal response was just barely usable on the linux box.
> (e.g. it took 4 min. to get top running in another console window)
> 
> This was an ide drive but still...

I think you will need to switch on DMA to get respons back from the box.
This is very critical when using IDE drives. In PIO modes your CPU wll
have to work harder.

> Adding to this a little later on...
> I did a little further stress testing
>  
> dd if=/dev/zero of=./test bs=1M count=3000
> xfs=23 mins
> ext2=22 mins
> eliminating nfs and xfs
> same buried processor.  It must be a kernel thing.
> 
> kswapd and kupdated were the big cpu hogs, although
> there was never any swap used.

Sounds like your isn't  using DMA.

Cheers
Seth


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