NFS file server performance
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Josip Loncaric josip at icase.eduMon Mar 26 11:29:35 PST 2001
- Previous message: NFS file server performance
- Next message: NFS file server performance
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Dan Yocum wrote: > > Josip Loncaric wrote: > > > > Linux NFS is a bottleneck in itself, even with Gigabit Ethernet. You > > can speed up the network, but the current Linux NFS implementation has > > limitations which make it five times slower than other forms of file > > Well, I think that statement requires a little more qualification: Linux > <-> Linux NFSv2 performance is quite good - up to about 8MB/s on fast > ethernet. Linux <-> Linux NFSv2 over Gigabit Ethernet performs worse than over Fast Ethernet, but rcp and ftp improve by about a factor of 2.5-3. While rcp/ftp use TCP, NFSv2 uses UDP and each of its 8KB blocks is split into 6 UDP packets. If any of the six is lost, all six have to be resent. To minimize this unhappy situation, our Gigabit Ethernet cards interrupt the CPU only on every 6th packet received, but the fundamental problem is that faster networks increase the probablilty that NFSv2 will drop some packets, so after retransmits the performance gets worse than what you'd see on a slower network. Unfortunately, Linux NFSv3 is not out of its development phase yet. To answer Art's questions, MPI communication uses TCP (not NFS), except of course when the code wants to access NFS mounted filesystems. Faster networks can improve global performance -- if communication is a bottleneck (when this can be avoided, faster network won't help much). While the PCI bus can limit performance of any high-end network card, this limit is 133 MB/s or higher. With the right hardware, you can typically reach about an order of magnitude higher bandwidth than Fast Ethernet. Is it worth the cost? Would you rather have more CPUs or a faster network? You have to benchmark your code and then decide. Most of our codes are written to avoid the communication bottleneck. Only when this cannot be done do faster networks become attractive. Sincerely, Josip -- Dr. Josip Loncaric, Research Fellow mailto:josip at icase.edu ICASE, Mail Stop 132C PGP key at http://www.icase.edu./~josip/ NASA Langley Research Center mailto:j.loncaric at larc.nasa.gov Hampton, VA 23681-2199, USA Tel. +1 757 864-2192 Fax +1 757 864-6134
- Previous message: NFS file server performance
- Next message: NFS file server performance
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
