sweetpotatopie2021 <sweetpotatopie2...@protonmail.com> wrote: > However I have a plea: AFS has never noted as a real speed demon for data > transfer. But its lack of performance is cited as a contributing factor > leading some who might otherwise use AFS to consider alternatives (smb, nfs, > cloud).
One problem that I've been seeing with kAFS on Linux is that UDP packets appear to get batched by the NIC. The NIC may wait for, say, 32 packets to be buffered before starting transmission. This means that ACKs get batched. I have patches to add tracepoints into a number of Linux NIC drivers if anyone is interested in having a look for themselves. I have a pair of Intel 82599ES 10G NICs, one in the server and one in my test client. It seems like they cheat for TCP in a couple of ways: firstly, ACKs seem to happen faster and secondly, the TCP window size seems to get larger than the hard limit - I see packets up to ~64K. Possibly the NIC is stitching them back together. David _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel