*BSD News Article 34017


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:12174 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3086
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!psuvax1!news.pop.psu.edu!ra.nrl.navy.mil!sundance!cmetz
From: cmetz@sundance.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Craig Metz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: Whats wrong with Linux networking ???
Date: 8 Aug 1994 12:07:28 GMT
Organization: Information Technology Division, Naval Research Laboratory
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <325760$rc9@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
References: <Cu107E.Mz3@curia.ucc.ie> <31vo1b$87t@quagga.ru.ac.za>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sundance.itd.nrl.navy.mil

In article <31vo1b$87t@quagga.ru.ac.za>, Geoff Rehmet <csgr@cs.ru.ac.za> wrote:
>In <Cu107E.Mz3@curia.ucc.ie> dave@odyssey.ucc.ie writes:
>
>>OK, I keep hearing reference to how Linux networking is not as good
>>as FreeBSD and so forth
>...
>>what I want to know is, can anyone back this up with facts ? What
>>exactly doesn't Linux do (or does do, but incorrectly) ?
>
>A major difference I have noticed is that on Linux NFS runs at a
>fraction of the speed achieved on FreeBSD.  This is mainly due to a far
>more simplistic implementation (I didn't compare the code much, but this
>is very obvious).  Probably a big factor is the absence of the nfsiod
>(aka biod in SunOS) in Linux.  It might be a good idea to base a
>reimplementation on the nqnfs work in 4.4BSD - which implements cache
>coherency under NFS via leasing.

	The Linux NFS implementation, the client side especially, is very
bare-bones. Because of this, it couldn't hold a candle to the 4.4BSD NFS
implementation. I expect, however, that someone will implement improvements
from 4.4BSD.