Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #191243
| From | Michael <pikim@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: NFS4 file transfers fail or are very slow |
| Date | 2018-01-17 23:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <v93Ut-4I2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <v8ImZ-6Ih-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <v8XYK-Ps-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Am 17.01.2018 um 16:37 schrieb Dan Ritter: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:41:05PM +0100, Michael wrote: >> Hello guys, >> >> I have recently installed Debian Stretch 9.3 on a new PC and I'd just like >> to provide some NFS shares for other Linux machines in the LAN (1GBit). With >> small files everything works fine, but if I try to copy, e.g., a 7GB file >> with rsync it starts with a high transmission rate above 160MB/s and then >> goes down to around 70-90MB/s. After a random but short time there's no more >> progress going on for about 10-15 seconds. When the process then continues, >> the speed goes down to around 20MB/s and then up to about 200MB/s. It seems >> to continue transferring data, but rsync gives me an error message in the >> end. > > Max throughput on 1Gb/s ethernet is slightly less than 125 MB > per second. Bits versus bytes, you know. > > Anytime you see a rate above that, you're actually seeing > compression ratios rather than on-the-line bytes. Rsync is doing > that for you, > > 90MB/s is a normalish large-file transfer rate for > not-very-compressible data being read off of a spinning disk. Just for clarification: my given rates were read from SSD and written to a spinning disk (WD Red). > rsync also makes an awful lot of disk seeks in the attempt to > not transfer data that it doesn't need to transfer. But it does that via NFS as well as via SMB, doesn't it? >> Exactly the same share is able to write more than 105MB/s via SMB/CIFS, so I >> would expect an NFS speed in a similar range. > > Protocol overhead. Have you tried running a network benchmark? I installed and ran iperf, but I don't know whether that provides reasonable results: ------------------------------------------------------------ Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 4] local 192.168.192.10 port 5001 connected with 192.168.192.20 port 44282 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.09 GBytes 936 Mbits/sec When I copy the same file 3 times onto the same share I get an average of 108 MB/s with SMB/CIFS 84 MB/s with NFS (async,no_subtree_check) But in many/most comparisons you can find in the internet, NFS is having a higher performance. So isn't that the case in real worldapplications? > -dsr- Michael
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
NFS4 file transfers fail or are very slow Michael <pikim@web.de> - 2018-01-17 00:00 +0100
Re: NFS4 file transfers fail or are very slow Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2018-01-17 16:40 +0100
Re: NFS4 file transfers fail or are very slow Michael <pikim@web.de> - 2018-01-17 23:00 +0100
Re: NFS4 file transfers fail or are very slow Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-01-17 23:30 +0100
Re: NFS4 file transfers fail or are very slow Michael <pikim@web.de> - 2018-01-18 07:20 +0100
csiph-web