Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!qmw-cs!liam From: liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk (William Roberts;) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs Subject: Re: NFS biod question Message-ID: <2795@redstar.cs.qmw.ac.uk> Date: 11 Dec 90 11:33:38 GMT References: <565@bcstec.boeing.com> Sender: usenet@cs.qmw.ac.uk Lines: 20 Nntp-Posting-Host: whitesand In thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes: >The biod enhances performance by supporting read-ahead and write-behind. >When you post write requests, the biod waits for the confirmation from >the server on your behalf, and it tries to get a few server blocks into >the buffer cache before they are needed. The system should perform >exactly the same without the biods running, except that your processes >will be slower at doing I/O over NFS. I always tell people this as well, but lately I find myself wondering exactly what happens if you don't have biods. Does all NFS writing become synchronous, or do random processes get saddled with waiting for NFS replies? I seem to recall that NFS readahead was disabled if there are no biods; is this true? -- William Roberts ARPA: liam@cs.qmw.ac.uk Queen Mary & Westfield College UUCP: liam@qmw-cs.UUCP Mile End Road AppleLink: UK0087 LONDON, E1 4NS, UK Tel: 071-975 5250 (Fax: 081-980 6533)