Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!monoli!csoft!newsserv From: Igor Sviridov <sia@lot.cs.kiev.ua> Subject: Re: NFS write performance X-Return-Path: lotua!lot.cs.kiev.ua!sia Reply-To: sia-@UA.NET Organization: Communication Systems Research Team, Kiev, Ukraine Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 21:46:43 GMT Message-ID: <802730803PCTIN@lot.cs.kiev.ua> Lines: 43 Sender: news-service@monolit.kiev.ua In article <3r3tql$e4e@si-nic.hrz.uni-siegen.de> peter@netz.hrz.uni-siegen.de (Peter Merz) writes: > a few weeks ago I installed SNAP-950412 on my two systems > (a pentium and a 486). To my surprise I found that NFS > performance has significantly increased from 1.1. > But there is a big gap between writing and reading, > on my machines > 170 KByte/s for writing > and 800 KByte/s for reading. > > Are there any changes in the new version (2.0.5) concering > nfs? If you want to enter dark land of asynchronous nfs, apply following patch (relative to 2.0R, but trivial to add to any SNAP) and recompile kernel with ASYNC_NFS option. I wonder, if this will be sysctl-setable in 2.0.5? *** nfs_serv.c.orig Sun Oct 2 19:26:58 1994 --- nfs_serv.c Fri Jun 9 23:37:03 1995 *************** nfsrv_write(nfsd, mrep, md, dpos, cred, *** 575,581 **** --- 575,585 ---- register long t1; caddr_t bpos; int error = 0, rdonly, cache, siz, len, xfer; + #ifdef ASYNC_NFS + int ioflags = IO_NODELOCKED; + #else int ioflags = IO_SYNC | IO_NODELOCKED; + #endif char *cp2; struct mbuf *mb, *mb2, *mreq; struct vnode *vp; > -- > -- Peter Merz, pmerz@hrz.uni-siegen.de -- > -- Igor