All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Holmes <jholmes@psu.edu>
To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: 2.4 vs. 2.6 nfs client performance
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:05:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3FB27670.4C878A84@psu.edu> (raw)

Hi,

I'm running some NFS performance tests to determine the best way to go
to configure a few fileservers for some linux clusters I run.  Right now
I'm getting together a suite of test programs representative of the
typical applications we see run on our clusters (scientific applications
such as Ansys or Abaqus, custom MPI code, etc.) for use as a benchmark
suite that I can disperse across 16 machines or so to create a decent
load on the fileservers.  I've just got started with a program called
Gaussian03 (molecular modelling code that does a lot of I/O) and I'm
already seeing some odd performance differences between the 2.4.22
client and the 2.6.0-test9-mm1 client (both against a 2.6.0-test9-mm2
server):

async mounts
------------
2.4.22:           110.87user 43.69system 4:04.58elapsed 63%CPU
2.6.0-test9-mm1:  111.88user 315.57system 9:51.87elapsed 72%CPU

sync mounts
-----------
2.4.22:           109.99user 45.49system 32:04.44elapsed 8%CPU
2.6.0-test9-mm1:  112.33user 197.76system 1:08:13elapsed 7%CPU

Note that the 1:08:13 in the sync 2.6.0-test9-mm1 is 1 *hour*, 8
minutes, not 1 *minute*.  In both cases the 2.6 client came in at about
twice the time.  A local run not using NFS finishes in 2:13.49.

The nfsstats output for two async runs looks like:

-- 2.4.22 --
Client nfs v3:
null       getattr    setattr    lookup     access     readlink
0       0% 880     0% 0       0% 160     0% 4745    0% 0       0%
read       write      create     mkdir      symlink    mknod
780     0% 178588 32% 24      0% 0       0% 0       0% 0       0%
remove     rmdir      rename     link       readdir    readdirplus
24      0% 0       0% 0       0% 0       0% 18      0% 0       0%
fsstat     fsinfo     pathconf   commit
3       0% 3       0% 0       0% 369185 66%

Client rpc stats:
calls      retrans    authrefrsh
554410     2099       0


-- 2.6.0-test9-mm1 --

Client nfs v3:
null       getattr    setattr    lookup     access     readlink
0       0% 740     0% 0       0% 126     0% 249     0% 0       0%
read       write      create     mkdir      symlink    mknod
855     0% 178574 14% 24      0% 0       0% 0       0% 0       0%
remove     rmdir      rename     link       readdir    readdirplus
24      0% 0       0% 0       0% 0       0% 18      0% 0       0%
fsstat     fsinfo     pathconf   commit
0       0% 3       0% 0       0% 1023777 85%

Client rpc stats:
calls      retrans    authrefrsh
1204390    5          0

The 2.6 client has over twice the number of RPC calls and almost 3 times
the number of commits whereas the 2.4 client has alot more accesses. 
Mounts were done with rsize=32768,wsize=32768.  The NFS filesystem is
ext3.  The two machines are connected via gigabit ethernet and the
traffic between them never goes above 20-30 MB/s.

Can someone clue me in as to why this may be happening and if it's a
"bug" or not?

Thanks,

--
Jason Holmes


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

             reply	other threads:[~2003-11-12 18:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-11-12 18:05 Jason Holmes [this message]
2003-11-12 20:20 ` 2.4 vs. 2.6 nfs client performance Trond Myklebust
2003-11-12 20:51   ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-12 21:18     ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-12 21:33       ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-12 23:22         ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-13  1:20           ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-13  2:07             ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-13 14:16               ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-13 21:55                 ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-14  0:22                   ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-14 18:37                     ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-14 21:11                       ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-16 15:54                         ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-13 15:56               ` Eric Whiting
2003-11-13 17:55                 ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-13 18:59                   ` Eric Whiting
2003-11-13 19:09                     ` Eric Whiting
2003-11-13 19:28                       ` Trond Myklebust
2003-11-13 19:18                     ` Jason Holmes
2003-11-12 22:08 ` Eric Whiting
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-11-13 19:42 Duc Vianney
2003-11-13 20:02 ` Trond Myklebust

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3FB27670.4C878A84@psu.edu \
    --to=jholmes@psu.edu \
    --cc=nfs@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.