On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:17:25AM +0900, Jorgen Lundman wrote: >> 0.1 second per file. Do not forget, we performed about 2250 rm operations and >> manu lookups too. If I am not missing anything the cadence is roughly same >> across the whole snoop file. >> >> If we consider this "slow" we should compare it with a "fast" case... >> > > If a 7 year old netapp can untar it in 11 seconds, I was surprised to > see Solaris take 5 minutes. Perhaps that is my expectations at fault.
Ok. We need to see snoop for this netapp fast case too. Without the snoop we can't say anything. Please provide the snoop for this really fast netapp case for comparison. What are the mount options for both cases? > > However, I find it curious that, this morning I have > > gtar over nfs4 > prov01:/mnt/.test9# time gtar -zxf MTOS-4.261-ja.tar.gz > > real 2m36.787s This is because you probably saved 60 second at start of the operation. > Lets replace gtar and nfsd, with rsync and sshd. So now everything is > identical (network, servers, OS) but not using nfsd. > > prov01:/mnt/.test10# time rsync -are ssh /tmp/MTOS-4.261-ja > 4500-07.unix:/mnt/.test10/ > > real 0m1.387s What was in 4500-07.unix:/mnt/.test10/ before you ran rsync? > > > Yeah! That's what we want to see. Just over 1 second. If I do the same > rsync to the mounted file-system: > > > prov01:/mnt/.test12# time rsync -are ssh /tmp/MTOS-4.261-ja . > > > real 3m44.857s What was in . before you invoked rsync? > > > What about sharesmb=on. I don't have a client with smbfs enabled, so I > used my OSX desktop, which is a few networks away (all internal networks > at least): > > lundman(/Volumes/zpool1_zero_www/.test13) time tar -zxf > ~/Desktop/MTOS-4.261-ja.tar.gz > > real 0m24.480s How smb handle caches? Went all of the data really over the wire? -- Marcel Telka Solaris RPE
