Alan, is it normal for FTP to be 2x as fast as NFS?With 100mbps, I never seemed to have any issues, but with GIGABIT I definitely see all sorts of weird issues.
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, Alan Cox wrote:
On Maw, 2006-01-17 at 18:48 +0100, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:I wonder how much faster NFS over TCP would be, or if NFS in the kernel is the problem itself?On Linux NFS over TCP is slower than over UDP ~10%.For the specific case you measured. Its never quite that simple because behaviour over different networks and error patterns varies a lot and TCP can be a big win on loaded networks or under error conditions, especially packet loss, where fragmentation losses kill throughput on UDP.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- References:
- Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Phil Oester <kernel@linuxace.com>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczek@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>
- Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
- Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- Prev by Date: Kernel crash on alpha cpu 2.6.13-2.6.15
- Next by Date: Re: differences between MADV_FREE and MADV_DONTNEED
- Previous by thread: Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- Next by thread: Re: Kernel 2.6.15.1 + NFS is 4 times slower than FTP!?
- Index(es):
![]() |