Rick
Do you have more details on the issue is it 8.x only ? Can you point
us to the stable thread abourt this ?
The bug is in the krpc, which means it's 8.x specific (at least for NFS,
I'm not sure if the nlm used the krpc in 7.x?).
David P. Discher reported a performance problem some time
As requested earlier, I've moved the thread to freebsd-stable. -- George
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Among four machines on my network, I'm observing startling differences
in NFS performance. All machines are AMD64, and rpc_statd, rpc_lockd,
and amd are enabled on all four machines.
wonderland:
hw.model: AMD Athlon(tm) II Dual-Core M32
hw.physmem: 293510758
ethernet: 100Mb/s
partition 1
machines on my network, I'm observing startling differences
in NFS performance. All machines are AMD64, and rpc_statd, rpc_lockd,
and amd are enabled on all four machines.
wonderland:
hw.model: AMD Athlon(tm) II Dual-Core M32
hw.physmem: 293510758
ethernet: 100Mb/s
partition 1: FreeBSD 8.1
George
I remember reading there was some sort of nfs issues in 8.1-RELEASE,
a regression of some sort it was noted early on in the release. Have
you tried this with 8.2-RC1 also what are your nfs client mount
options ?
I'll update to 8.2-RC1 later today and see if anything changes, but
FYI, -stable is probably the better list for this.
On 01/08/2011 09:54, george+free...@m5p.com wrote:
George
I remember reading there was some sort of nfs issues in 8.1-RELEASE,
a regression of some sort it was noted early on in the release. Have
you tried this with 8.2-RC1 also what are
FYI, -stable is probably the better list for this.
On 01/08/2011 09:54, george+free...@m5p.com wrote:
George
I remember reading there was some sort of nfs issues in 8.1-RELEASE,
a regression of some sort it was noted early on in the release. Have
you tried this with 8.2-RC1 also
four machines on my network, I'm observing startling
differences
in NFS performance. All machines are AMD64, and rpc_statd,
rpc_lockd,
and amd are enabled on all four machines.
wonderland:
hw.model: AMD Athlon(tm) II Dual-Core M32
hw.physmem: 293510758
ethernet: 100Mb/s
On 01/08/2011 10:19, george+free...@m5p.com wrote:
No, I did not report the problems then.-- George
Well we're glad you're reporting them now. :)
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go
Breadth
Rick
Do you have more details on the issue is it 8.x only ? Can you point
us to the stable thread abourt this ?
On 1/8/11, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 01/08/2011 10:19, george+free...@m5p.com wrote:
No, I did not report the problems then.-- George
Well
I think leaving the 4.x clients in a known configuration and just
varying
the server configurations the right starting point. Let's try tracking
the server 5.x stability/performance first, then look into the client
4.x
crash reports.
I've seen amazing performance differences between 4.9 and
On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 09:02:01PM -0500, John wrote:
This is an open ended email with a question about how
to increase performance of a 4-stable system running in a
high-load environment. The src is current as of:
It may be worth chatting to Daniel Ellard, who has some interesting
PRs open
The tweaks I've been working on are for read performance. Based on
what you sent, I don't think read performance is your problem at all
(although they might help you anyway, in the long run). So, my advice
might be no more useful than line noise, but here goes:
1. You've got a nfsd taking 48%
Hi Folks,
This is an open ended email with a question about how
to increase performance of a 4-stable system running in a
high-load environment. The src is current as of:
FreeBSD 4.8-RC #1: Sun Mar 16 15:44:01
Running top on the system:
PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZERES STATE
14 matches
Mail list logo
