Poor nfs performance (in comarison to ftp) - NFS

This is a discussion on Poor nfs performance (in comarison to ftp) - NFS ; I've got two (infact more machines are in my network, but that doesn't matter) gentoo-linux-machines running kernel 2.6 connected over 100mbit ethernet. Copying a large file from server to client over nfs gives me just about 3,5mbyte/s throughput. Both machines ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Poor nfs performance (in comarison to ftp)

  1. Poor nfs performance (in comarison to ftp)

    I've got two (infact more machines are in my network, but that doesn't
    matter) gentoo-linux-machines running kernel 2.6 connected over 100mbit
    ethernet. Copying a large file from server to client over nfs gives me just
    about 3,5mbyte/s throughput. Both machines can give more, as a test over
    ftp (vsftpd) between these gave about 6,7mb/s throughput (tested with other
    file on same disk/partition to prevent cached-results).
    I played around a bit with rsize/wsize options of nfs and tried nfsv2 and v3
    - no better results.
    So what might be the reason for this really bad nfs-performance? As nfs is a
    kernel-feature it shouldn't so terrible slow compared to ftp...

  2. Re: Poor nfs performance (in comarison to ftp)

    Andreas Peter wrote in message news:<2gctk9F1cj41U1@uni-berlin.de>...
    > I've got two (infact more machines are in my network, but that doesn't
    > matter) gentoo-linux-machines running kernel 2.6 connected over 100mbit
    > ethernet. Copying a large file from server to client over nfs gives me just
    > about 3,5mbyte/s throughput. Both machines can give more, as a test over
    > ftp (vsftpd) between these gave about 6,7mb/s throughput (tested with other
    > file on same disk/partition to prevent cached-results).
    > I played around a bit with rsize/wsize options of nfs and tried nfsv2 and v3
    > - no better results.
    > So what might be the reason for this really bad nfs-performance? As nfs is a
    > kernel-feature it shouldn't so terrible slow compared to ftp...


    Are you using UDP?

    What are your timeouts?

    What kernel are you using?

    Also, with NFSv2, the server won't respond to requests until the
    data is written to stable storage.

    Since ftp has to stable storage requirements, and since it streams
    transfers over tcp, this is usually the cause the disparity in
    performance.

  3. Re: Poor nfs performance (in comarison to ftp)

    Mike Eisler wrote:
    > Are you using UDP?


    Tried both tcp and udp, but with similar rates.

    > What are your timeouts?


    Hm, I really don't know where they are set....
    >
    > What kernel are you using?


    2.6.6 at the moment on both machines.

    I also noticed that when I set "RPCNFSDCOUNT" to 1 (was 8 before), I get
    rates up to 5mb/s, but CPU usage of the server goes up to 100% (okay, it is
    just an K6-2 450, but it shouldn't take 100% of its CPU to throw simple
    5mb/s out...)

    Thanks



+ Reply to Thread