Marc Grimme wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 July 2008 20:52:07 John R Pierce wrote:
> > Mag Gam wrote:
> > >> 70-80Mb/sec.
> > >
> > > MB, sorry :-)
> >
> > thats on the order of 700-800Mbit/sec, which is quite good for a single
> > session on GigE. as others have said, the sort of bonding you're doing
On Wednesday 30 July 2008 20:52:07 John R Pierce wrote:
> Mag Gam wrote:
> >> 70-80Mb/sec.
> >
> > MB, sorry :-)
>
> thats on the order of 700-800Mbit/sec, which is quite good for a single
> session on GigE. as others have said, the sort of bonding you're doing
> doesn't speed up single transfers
Mag Gam wrote:
70-80Mb/sec.
MB, sorry :-)
thats on the order of 700-800Mbit/sec, which is quite good for a single
session on GigE. as others have said, the sort of bonding you're doing
doesn't speed up single transfers, instead it helps with multiple
concurrent sessions.
_
Mag Gam wrote on Wed, 30 Jul 2008 07:10:13 -0400:
> >70-80Mb/sec.
> MB, sorry :-)
Then I don't think it's bad, it's actually quite good for a single NIC and
in the normal range for two bonded NICs. I get a maximum of 30 MB/s
between two 1000 NICs over a SOHO Switch from Netgear in my office, no
Mag Gam wrote:
> I am using mode 0, which is an aggregate.
>
> I have 2 clients, which are bonded too.
>
>
>>70-80Mb/sec.
> MB, sorry :-)
That's totally different then, 80MBytes/second is very fast.
What kind of storage is behind the NFS?
Run iostat -x 1 100 on the server while your doing the tes
PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: CentOS mailing list
Sent: Tue Jul 29 23:20:10 2008
Subject: [CentOS] slow NFS speed
We upgraded from a 10/100Mbs to a 2 100/1000 bonding. We notice the
speeds of NFS to be around 70-80Mb/sec. Which is slow, especially with
bonding. I was wondering if we need
Mag Gam wrote:
...
into. Would a tcp window help? Would increasing the number of server
and client processes help (not sure how to do that BTW). Any others
To change the number of server processes edit /etc/sysconfig/nfs,
remove the # from the line:
#RPCNFSDCOUNT=8
and increase the number 8.
I am using mode 0, which is an aggregate.
I have 2 clients, which are bonded too.
>70-80Mb/sec.
MB, sorry :-)
I was wondering if there were any tuning parameters I should look
into. Would a tcp window help? Would increasing the number of server
and client processes help (not sure how to do tha
Mag Gam wrote on Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:20:10 -0400:
> 70-80Mb/sec.
Mb or MB?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/
On Wednesday 30 July 2008 05:20:10 Mag Gam wrote:
> We upgraded from a 10/100Mbs to a 2 100/1000 bonding. We notice the
> speeds of NFS to be around 70-80Mb/sec. Which is slow, especially with
> bonding. I was wondering if we need to tune anything special with the
> Network and NFS. Does anyone hav
John R Pierce wrote:
Mag Gam wrote:
We upgraded from a 10/100Mbs to a 2 100/1000 bonding. We notice the
speeds of NFS to be around 70-80Mb/sec. Which is slow, especially with
bonding. I was wondering if we need to tune anything special with the
Network and NFS. Does anyone have any experience wi
Mag Gam wrote:
> We upgraded from a 10/100Mbs to a 2 100/1000 bonding. We notice the
> speeds of NFS to be around 70-80Mb/sec. Which is slow, especially with
> bonding. I was wondering if we need to tune anything special with the
> Network and NFS. Does anyone have any experience with this?
What k
Mag Gam wrote:
We upgraded from a 10/100Mbs to a 2 100/1000 bonding. We notice the
speeds of NFS to be around 70-80Mb/sec. Which is slow, especially with
bonding. I was wondering if we need to tune anything special with the
Network and NFS. Does anyone have any experience with this?
my gener
We upgraded from a 10/100Mbs to a 2 100/1000 bonding. We notice the
speeds of NFS to be around 70-80Mb/sec. Which is slow, especially with
bonding. I was wondering if we need to tune anything special with the
Network and NFS. Does anyone have any experience with this?
TIA
_
14 matches
Mail list logo
