All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thanos Chatziathanassiou <tchatzi@arx.gr>
To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Performance Difference based on .... ?
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:37:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <40F2CC44.7080104@arx.gr> (raw)

Hello list,

I have come to a dead-end...
How come on a freshly mounted file-system, compiling takes considerably 
less time than on subsequent runs ?
I mean, this snip of shell:
---snip---
for i in 1 2 3
do
time ./apachectl configtest
done
---snip---
2:17.23 on the first run, while it takes
3:21.92 on the second and
3:20.78 on the third run.

The network is 1gb ethernet, with jumbo frames 9000 and tests were run 
both on 4096 and 8192 rsize/wsize with more or less similar results.
Client is 2x AthlonMP 1800+, server is 2x AthlonMP 2200+, kernel on both 
is 2.4.26+Trond's linux-2.4.26.NFS.ALL patch,
mount is udp - essentially so, because this is meant to be a high 
availability setup.
The only real limitation is the rate at which the server can feed data 
to the client, since cpu is 31% on the first and 20% on the second and 
third runs.

Any ideas ? Any other info I can give that might help ?

Regards,
Thanos Chatziathanassiou



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - 
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, 
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs

                 reply	other threads:[~2004-07-12 17:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=40F2CC44.7080104@arx.gr \
    --to=tchatzi@arx.gr \
    --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.