Thanks for all the replies. It's not a HD problem.
On monday I'll increase the number of nfsd processes and the number of
nfsiod on the client, setting both to 50,
I think that the nfs performance will be much better :-)
Mariano.
Eric Anderson wrote:
Francisco Reyes wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, mariano benedettini wrote:
91.3% idle
CPU is not the problem. :-)
Mem: 1599M Active, 1704M Inact, 311M Wired, 189M Cache, 112M Buf, 14M
Free
Swap: 2023M Total, 184K Used, 2023M Free
Swap is not the problem.
Do
vmstat 10
Watch the output.
In particular look at the first 3 columns.
procs
r b w
1 1 0
0 1 0
1 1 0
The left most column is CPU, the second column is disk IO.
If you have a number in the "b" column and it never hits 0 you have an
I/O problem. You HDs are not catching up.
If you are using NFS and the "b" colun is not high and hits 0 some/all
the time then the bottleneck is either the nfs connection or the nfs
server.
For example I have some servers that the "b" column would be between
20 and 60 for a while. I am currently working on removing some of the
load of the machine. In my case more memory would help, but the
computer vendor we bought the machine from has sent us the wrong
memory 3 TIMES!!
Also, if it is an NFS server, one should check the cpu times on the nfsd
processes. I've found that many times there aren't enough nfsd
processes to take the load from many clients. Increasing the number
(double it) often helps this. The max in 5.3 is 20, but you can easily
change it and get around it.
Eric
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
