home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!decuac!pa.dec.com!decprl!decprl!boyd
- From: boyd@prl.dec.com (Boyd Roberts)
- Subject: Re: NFS packet size
- Message-ID: <1993Jan1.115015.17311@prl.dec.com>
- Sender: news@prl.dec.com (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: spooky.prl.dec.com
- Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Paris Research Laboratory
- References: <u97b4fc@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com> <C04t4o.K10@news.iastate.edu> <1992Dec31.201252.4908@prl.dec.com> <C05ICp.CF0@news.iastate.edu>
- Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 11:50:15 GMT
- Lines: 21
-
- In article <C05ICp.CF0@news.iastate.edu>, john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) writes:
- >
- > And how would I turn that on under Ultrix? ;-)
-
- You can't :-(
-
- > A dropped TCP fragment can result in a large amount of resending too.
-
- True, but that all happens at the TCP/IP level which is far more
- responsive than NFS's 1, 2, 4, 8 ... _second_ exponential backoff
- when a datagram gets lost.
-
- We had a flakey drop cable here a while back. When it was bad it would
- take in the order of a minute to write an 8K block. You could see the
- fragments being dropped and the NFS retries. I _never_ want to see
- that again -- it was _awful_.
-
-
- Boyd Roberts boyd@prl.dec.com
-
- ``When the going gets wierd, the weird turn pro...''
-