Re: NFS and kernel 2.6.x

[Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 11:44:33AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 10:29:06PM -0700, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > På to , 15/04/2004 klokka 21:59, skreiv Phil Oester:
> > 
> > > If simply upgrading from 2.4.x to 2.6.x is going to make UDP mounts unusable,
> > > perhaps this should be documented -- or the option should be deprecated.
> > 
> > Put simply: I am not interested in wasting _my_ time investigating cases
> > where UDP is performing badly if TCP is working fine. The variable
> > reliability issues with UDP are precisely why we worked to get the TCP
> > stuff working efficiently.
> > 
> > As for blanket statements like the above: I have seen no evidence yet
> > that they are any more warranted in 2.6.x than they were in 2.4.x. At
> > least not as long as I continue to see wire speed performance on reads
> > and writes on UDP on all my own test setups.
> 
> Maaybe TCP should be the default then ? 

Or just make a big warning in the Kconfig. Distros will
set it to the default...

> In case no one finds the reason 
> why NFS over UDP is slower on 2.6.x than 2.4.x. It seems there are
> quite a few reports confirming the slowdown. Maybe Jamie Lokier is right in 
> theory?