3c59x: recurring transmit errors
Tue Jul 28 12:07:40 1998
Please don't start this sync vs. async file system crap. Nobody really
cares and while it starts out as a real debate it never ends in any kind
of agreement and just a bunch of silly name calling.
Your friend is somewhat correct on Linux NFS writes. Linux NFS writes
to another Linux box are quite fast. I've gotten over 2.5MB/s which I'm
quite happy with. Linux NFS writes to a Solaris server are horrendous.
I can't even get 300kB/s. No I'm not assigning blame, for all I know it
could be Solaris but I've seen at least 3 people verify the same behavior
and none knew how to "fix" it. No, changing the rsize and wsize did not
help at all. Maybe 5% but that's it. I've tried 1k, 2k, 4k, 8k, 16k, 32k.
I WAS pleasantly surprised that Solaris was able to quickly write to an
Linux NFS server. I would love to have this fixed and would gladly test
out suggestions or patches anyone has.
On Tue, 28 Jul 1998, Kevin Cameron wrote:
> HERE IS A COMMENT FROM A FRIEND:
> have you tried nfs writes under linux ?
> in the best case, it is 10% of the performance
> of nfs writes under solaris or freebsd.
> (i use freebsd because it handles large jobs,
> much, much better than linux, and handles nfs
> a million times better than linux. however,
> linux is more popular, and may win in the long
> run. i tell people: if you use linux instead
> of windoz-nt, consider yourself very, very fortunate.
> if you use freebsd instead, consider yourself
> enlightened). watch out for disk crashes under
> linux - the extfs file system is like the ufs
> filesystem running with the -async switch - ie,
> fsck equivalent under linux is not guarnteed to be
> able to recover from all power crashes (bob
> ran into this, and has now switched
> to freebsd).
> You might be blaming the wrong thing.