Hi,

does mandatory vs. advisory locking make a difference in performance in your NFSv4 tests ?

I would suggest to open a service request

Hi,

It's some kind of application program is running on the linux host as the MQSeries user....

So this will impact the performance?

Thanks,

Praveen

I dont know – never tried it

We are also seeing awful nfsv4 performance out of our new Isilon. We have multiple calls into EMC about the issue, so hopefully it get's resolved but I'm not holding my breath.

Here's a quick apache benchmark result from our current environment of a Dell server running linux as an nfsv4 server

###NFSv4 mount to Dell server running linux with nfsv4 server

# mount

HOSTNAME:/www on /export/web type nfs4

(rw,addr=IPADDRESS,clientaddr=IPADDRESS)

Time taken for tests:   6.491 seconds

Requests per second:    154.07 [#/sec] (mean)

Time per request:       162.268 [ms] (mean)

Time per request:       6.491 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)

  50%    155

  66%    163

  75%    169

  80%    173

  90%    186

  95%    234

  98%    268

  99%    280

100%    305 (longest request)

Here is the result from Isilon on NFS4

###NFSv4 mount

# mount

HOSTNAME:/ifs/shares/services/cws on /export/web type nfs4

(rw,addr=IPADDRESS,clientaddr=IPADDRESS)

# ab -n 1000 -c 25 -H 'Host: HOSTNAME' http://localhost/

Time taken for tests:   31.813 seconds

Requests per second:    31.43 [#/sec] (mean)

Time per request:       795.331 [ms] (mean)

Time per request:       31.813 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)

  50%    777

  66%    809

  75%    847

  80%    866

  90%    910

  95%    940

  98%    963

  99%    991

100%   1079 (longest request)

Isilon nfs3 is a similar result to our current hosting, but we don't wish to give up our existing firewall rules, NFS delegations, server-side-copy support, or have to redo our filesystem to get UID sync.