Well here is what I got from testing htree with NFS. http://labs.zianet.com/benchmarks_html/postmark_benchmarks_NFS_100_htree.html It looks like htree improves performance when the storage device is local(as per my previous post) but it looks like htree degrades performance when used in conjunction with NFS. I am going to try it with gigabit ethernet when I get the time to see if maybe I am possibly hitting some sort of weird network bottleneck. Steve
On the plus side however I ran an e2fsck on it after the test and it didn't find any problems with the filesystem. Steve kwijibo@zianet.com wrote:> Well here is what I got from testing htree with NFS. > > http://labs.zianet.com/benchmarks_html/postmark_benchmarks_NFS_100_htree.html > > > It looks like htree improves performance when the storage device is > local(as per > my previous post) but it looks like htree degrades performance when > used in conjunction > with NFS. I am going to try it with gigabit ethernet when I get the > time to see if > maybe I am possibly hitting some sort of weird network bottleneck. > > Steve > > > _______________________________________________ > Ext3-users mailing list > Ext3-users@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users > >
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 08:21:46PM -0600, kwijibo@zianet.com wrote:> > It looks like htree improves performance when the storage device is > local (as per my previous post) but it looks like htree degrades > performance when used in conjunction with NFS. I am going to try it > with gigabit ethernet when I get the time to see if maybe I am > possibly hitting some sort of weird network bottleneck.That's certainly a surprising result. Any chance you could get an ethereal capture of the traffic between the NFS client and server, both with and without htree? It might shed some light on what's going on, and perhaps suggest some way we can either fix the NFS server, or the interaction between the NFS server and the ext3 filesystem. - Ted