Tracy J. Di Marco White writes:
> 
> NetBSD and Linux are the NFS clients.  Linux is slower, I believe they've
> only gotten v2 to work.  I've gotten the NetBSD boxes to be slightly faster,
> I've changed -r & -w to 16K.  I'm not sure if that's led to improvement
> on the Linux boxes, I'll be checking benchmarks on them later today.

Here are some numbers from bonnie on my machine.  The NFS server is a
1.5_ALPHA2 system with a PII-400, 128MB, an epic ethernet (100FD), and
a 20GB UDMA/33 drive.  The client is a Duron 950, 256MB, fxp (100FD), and
it is running 1.5L with UBC.
The input numbers are not accurate due to having 256MB and UBC.  I will test
some more with larger files.
Anyway, I tested 64k/32k/16k/8k udp v3 mounts, a 16k udp v2, and a "default"
tcp mount. (a "default" v2 mount performed similar to the 16k v2 mount)
The difference between a v2 mount and a tcp mount was astonishing.  I did
not expect to see a 5x difference!

              -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
              -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
Machine    MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU  /sec %CPU
65k       100  5580 12.9  5784  7.2  5138 11.7 47708 102.7 230898 101.4 800.6 19.1
32k       100  6192 14.3  6268  7.7  5307 12.6 47860 102.1 230648 100.9 2088.3 39.0
16k       100  6392 15.0  6381  7.5  5315 10.4 47880 101.3 231486 100.8 2111.3 48.4
8k        100  3187  9.2  3188  4.4  3194  5.1 47842 112.8 234803 106.5 2614.4 47.8
16kv2     100  1793  4.7  1789  2.4  1938  5.2  8111 22.0 234653 99.2 1752.2 37.9
tcpmnt    100  8772 23.9  9463 11.6  5969 11.6 47381 98.2 223368 98.6 1816.6 39.3

What benchmarks are you using, and what numbers are you getting?

-Andrew