[OpenAFS] OpenAFS speed - some benchmarks

[Rodney M Dyer]

At 08:44 PM 6/24/2003 +0200, Andrei Maslennikov wrote:

>Well, if we escape cache on the client and do a direct
>copy to/from fileserver we gain almost a factor of 2
>on reads and up to 25% on writes (we used the "Atrans"
>binary authored by Rainer Toebbicke in our tests).
>
>Without cache on client, AFS is still some 25% less
>performant than NFS. This is (fileserver+rx). Of course,
>namei contributes visibly. We could probably estimate namei
>vs inode using Solaris x86 on a recent pc hardware (may be
>rather tricky, as the newest hardware may be not supported
>by this os).

How about trying the same test with multiple files at the same time.  While 
you're at it, do it with Kerberized NFS instead.  AFS might be slower, but 
NFS < v4 is totally unsecured.  Comparing AFS with NFS is just too 
complicated, the feature set is too different.  If you think you can, 
you're probably smoking the wrong stuff.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I think not 
one AFS user is going to throw away all the good stuff just to get more 
speed.  That said however, any increases that can be made in AFS would be 
welcomed, especially on the Win client.

Rodney