Re: NFS performance..

[WipeOut <wipe_out@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Craig White wrote:

> On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 02:55, WipeOut wrote:
>  
>
> > Chris Miller wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > Have you given NFS tcp a try?  UDP works but has its down sides.  One of
> > > them being if you need to retransmit. 
> > >
> > > /etc/fstab
> > >
> > > nfs:/nfswrite    /nfswrite  nfs
> > > noatime,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,actimeo=60,bg,intr,timeo=14,tcp,nfsvers=3       0 0
> > >
> > >
> > > Works real good for me.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > I didn't try NFS over TCP, main reason being I figured that I have a 
> > reliable lint between the two PC I was testing with.. UDP having a lower 
> > overhead seemed the best choice for throughput.. I read that TCP was 
> > only required for networks that had a lot of collisions..
> >
> > I will give TCP a try anyway...
> >    
> ----
> do post up your conclusions - if any
>
> Thamks
>
> Craig
>
>
>  
I have just done a bit of testing using NFS over UDP and TCP..

My conclusions are that for the most part the performance difference 
between UDP and TCP is very small..

UDP is slightly faster in my test environment in various tests using 
bonnie++, iozone and straight reading and writing of files.. This is as 
it should be given the lower overhead of UDP..

TCP would probably have an advantage in a congested or unreliable 
network that was experiencing many collisions or packet loss which 
caused a lot of retransmissions..

Later..