home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!bcm!cephalo.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu!tso
- From: tso@cephalo.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu (Dan T'so)
- Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs
- Subject: Re: PC-NFS Speed Limitations
- Message-ID: <13618@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
- Date: 28 Jul 1992 02:17:18 GMT
- References: <1992Jul20.215338.6050@sal.wisc.edu>
- Sender: usenet@bcm.tmc.edu
- Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston,Tx
- Lines: 25
- Nntp-Posting-Host: cephalo.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu
-
- In article <1992Jul20.215338.6050@sal.wisc.edu> rej@larry.sal.wisc.edu (Randy Jones) writes:
- >I am using the PC-NFS implementation of TCP to transfer data to Vaxen.
- >And I'm unable to answer this question: why is it so slow?
-
- I also have timed PC-NFS on 486/33's and it is 3-10 times slower than
- the identical operation (reading a 1Mb file thru NFS) running on a MVAX, a
- CPU that is 10 times slower than the 486. So what gives ? The Ethernet card on
- the PC is a 3Com 503. It is an 8-bit card. I talked to SUN when I first bought
- the card and they said that they saw very little difference in performanace
- under PC-NFS when using either the 8-bit or 16-bit cards.
- So what is the highest performance configuration one can setup for a
- PC accessing NFS hosts ? Are there better Ethernet cards that will *definitely*
- under PC-NFS yield 2X or better improvement ? Are there better PC-NFS
- implementations that will yield 2X or better improvements ? Not looking for
- 10-20% improvements. Why is PC-NFS 3-10 times worse than a much slower CPU
- running UNIX ? If I run OS/2 or UNIX/Xenix on the PC, will its NFS performance
- improve significantly ?
- Thanks.
- Cheers,
- Dan Ts'o 212-327-7671
- Dept. Neurobiology dan@rna.rockefeller.edu
- Rockefeller Univ. ...s5!rna!dan
- 1230 York Ave. tso@rockvax.bitnet
- NY, NY 10021
-
-