Re: page_launder() on 2.4.9/10 issue

From: Stephan von Krawczynski (skraw@ithnet.com)
Date: Thu Sep 06 2001 - 10:10:49 EST


On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 16:02:04 +0100 Alex Bligh - linux-kernel
<linux-kernel@alex.org.uk> wrote:

> Stephan,
> >> You yourself proved this, by switching rsize,wsize to 1k and said
> >> it all worked fine! (unless I misread your email).
> >
> > Sorry, misunderstanding: I did not touch rsize/wsize. What I do is to lower
fs
> > action by not letting knfsd walk through the subtrees of a mounted fs. This
> > leads to less allocs/frees by the fs layer which tend to fail and let knfs
fail
> > afterwards.
>
> OK, I'm getting confused.

To end that:

What I meant was, I did not touch the values most everybody uses on NFS, which
is:
rsize=8192,wsize=8192
Using smaller values (or default = 1024) gives such a ridicolously bad
performance that I would even prefer samba.

Regards,
Stephan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:35 EST