NFS speeds vs Linux

Question

Level 1

56 points

NFS speeds vs Linux

There have been numerous posts in forums describing speed differences of 4 to 5 times between file transfers via nfs and a comparable linux box. Apple as far as I know has not addressed this issue and in our current studio we are looking at buying a significant number of workstations and macbook pros. But this networking issue is a dealbreaker.

Why doesn't apple step up and explain why nfs in os x under performs so significantly compared to linux? When is this problem going to be fixed?

j

Macbook Pro 2.16ghz, 2g ram, 100g drive, etc, Mac OS X (10.4.6), Pro Imaging Machine

Posted on Jan 17, 2007 10:03 AM

Reply

Answer 1

diffkid

Level 3

790 points

Jan 17, 2007 12:18 PM in response to jimmyt

Apple doesn't read these forums, and therefore will not provide you with the answer.

NFS isn't the only filesharing protocol available for Macs. If you have the luxury of using a Mac server to serve only other Macs, check out AFP. If not, you may want to try SMB.

Reply

Answer 2

Jan 17, 2007 11:10 PM in response to jimmyt

I've tried all 3 protocols and found them all equally fast, especially if you have good equipment. Is more difficult to setup, as you have to use the netinfo tool or switch to using the BSD flat file setup to match UIDs/GIDs. AFP can be compiled on just about any Unix and works pretty well, easy to setup. Samba/CIFS is by far (on my setup) the fastest and easiest to setup and tune. It also allows the occasional M$ 'puter to join in the fun!

Reply

Answer 3

jimmyt Author

Level 1

56 points

Jan 18, 2007 7:39 AM in response to Scott Micciche

SMB is slow across our network. And it's not comparing the different network protocols in OS X -- it specifically comparing NFS with NFS on linux -- OS X's is demonstrably slower by 4 to 5x. Search forums on nfs slow and you'll see the raft of people reporting the same problem.

j

Reply

Answer 4

diffkid

Level 3

790 points

Jan 18, 2007 7:55 AM in response to jimmyt

To be honest, you're not going to know until you try. People having problems with NFS are going to post to the forum. Those not having problems, aren't. Find a way to set up a test case, and then you'll know if the slower NFS is a dealbreaker.

Reply

Answer 5

jimmyt Author

Level 1

56 points

Jan 18, 2007 8:06 AM in response to diffkid

Test case whether nfs is slower in os x vs Linux? My first post specifically stated that we are finding this exactly issue in the studio -- linux transfer speeds of 10 - 12 mbs where as OS x is reporting - 2mbs.

SMB is not an option.

Reply

Answer 6

diffkid

Level 3

790 points

Jan 18, 2007 8:47 AM in response to jimmyt

You've only stated in your posts that others (on the forum) were reporting speed problems with NFS. You never mentioned your own tests.

Reply

Answer 7

jimmyt Author

Level 1

56 points

Jan 18, 2007 9:00 AM in response to diffkid

My mistake -- sorry. We are observing the same speed differences in our studio here as well. Streaming HD frames off a linux server, into Shake. Speeds of 10 - 15 mbs on linux and under 2 mbs on OS X.

Reply

Answer 8

SigmaX

Level 1

0 points

Jan 20, 2007 10:51 PM in response to jimmyt

Out of curiosity, does anybody know how Mac's NFS performance compare to FreeBSD's?

Reply

Answer 9

Jan 22, 2007 12:10 PM in response to SigmaX

We use FreeBSD and OpenBSD exclusively, the key is to tune the nfsd processes. I use 16 threads, as we hit the server concurrently pretty hard. My times for transferring over a gigabit switch are exactly the same as SMBFS and faster than AFP. YMMV.

Reply