Here is some sample output:

======> Writing in isolation (read protocol!=write protocol, read version!=write version, rsize!=wsize)
Creating 5 pipes
popening echo Number of measurements: $(wc -l)
popening echo Average number of seconds: $(cut -d " " -f 4 | avg -i)
popening echo Average time: $(cut -d " " -f 4 | avg -i | modtime -i)
popening sleep 1; echo Best time: $(cut -d " " -f 4 | highest -s $(expr 1024 \* 1024) -r -n 1 | modtime)
popening sleep 2; echo Best numbers:; highest -s $(expr 1024 \* 1024) -r -f 2 -n 5
Number of measurements: 26
Average number of seconds: 703.932692308
Average time: 11 minutes 43 seconds
Best time: 9 minutes 43 seconds
Best numbers:
xfer-result-Writing-16384-3-udp:Write time:  583.82
xfer-result-Writing-8192-3-tcp:Write time:  638.06
xfer-result-Writing-9216-3-tcp:Write time:  649.62
xfer-result-Writing-16384-3-tcp:Write time:  653.30
xfer-result-Writing-13312-3-tcp:Write time:  654.96

======> Reading in isolation (read protocol!=write protocol, read version!=write version, rsize!=wsize)
Creating 5 pipes
popening echo Number of measurements: $(wc -l)
popening echo Average number of seconds: $(cut -d " " -f 4 | avg -i)
popening echo Average time: $(cut -d " " -f 4 | avg -i | modtime -i)
popening sleep 1; echo Best time: $(cut -d " " -f 4 | highest -s $(expr 1024 \* 1024) -r -n 1 | modtime)
popening sleep 2; echo Best numbers:; highest -s $(expr 1024 \* 1024) -r -f 2 -n 5
Number of measurements: 25
Average number of seconds: 389.25
Average time: 6 minutes 29 seconds
Best time: 4 minutes 18 seconds
Best numbers:
xfer-result-Reading-16384-3-tcp:Read time:  258.31
xfer-result-Reading-8192-3-tcp:Read time:  337.19
xfer-result-Reading-9216-3-tcp:Read time:  339.16
xfer-result-Reading-10240-3-tcp:Read time:  340.15
xfer-result-Reading-12288-3-tcp:Read time:  340.26

======> Best composite of read and write (read protocol==write protocol, read version==write version, rsize!=wsize)
tcp 3 rsize: 4096 readtime: 485.49 wsize: 8192 writetime: 638.06 composite: 714.345
tcp 3 rsize: 5120 readtime: 471.15 wsize: 8192 writetime: 638.06 composite: 721.515
tcp 3 rsize: 6144 readtime: 471.14 wsize: 8192 writetime: 638.06 composite: 721.520
tcp 3 rsize: 7168 readtime: 469.20 wsize: 8192 writetime: 638.06 composite: 722.490
tcp 3 rsize: 4096 readtime: 485.49 wsize: 9216 writetime: 649.62 composite: 731.685
/\/\/\
udp 3 rsize: 5120 readtime: 514.31 wsize: 16384 writetime: 583.82 composite: 618.575
udp 3 rsize: 7168 readtime: 481.18 wsize: 16384 writetime: 583.82 composite: 635.140
udp 3 rsize: 4096 readtime: 473.37 wsize: 16384 writetime: 583.82 composite: 639.045
udp 3 rsize: 6144 readtime: 466.38 wsize: 16384 writetime: 583.82 composite: 642.540
udp 3 rsize: 9216 readtime: 405.25 wsize: 16384 writetime: 583.82 composite: 673.105
/\/\/\

======> Best composite of read and write (read protocol==write protocol, read version==write version, rsize==wsize)
tcp 3 8192 both sizes: 8192 readtime: 337.19 writetime: 638.06 composite: 788.495
udp 3 9216 both sizes: 9216 readtime: 405.25 writetime: 664.46 composite: 794.065
tcp 3 9216 both sizes: 9216 readtime: 339.16 writetime: 649.62 composite: 804.850
tcp 3 13312 both sizes: 13312 readtime: 341.15 writetime: 654.96 composite: 811.865
tcp 3 14336 both sizes: 14336 readtime: 372.20 writetime: 665.83 composite: 812.645

This sort of result leads one to consider a variety of mounting schemes to improve performance:

Mount scheme	Advantages	Disadvantages
One mount, preferring write speed	Simple, good write speed	read speed suffers
One mount, preferring read speed	Simple, good read speed	write speed suffers
One mount, balancing read and write speed	Simple, read and write speed not bad	both read and write speed suffer a bit
Two mounts, one for high read speed, one for high write speed	Good read speed and good write speed	A bit complicated for users.  Writes may not show up in the read mount immediately.
Three mounts, one for high read speed, one for high write speed, one for balanced read and write speed	Good read speed, good write speed, good "if you're switching from read to write, back and forth, a lot"	In a sense still more complicated (more mounts to think about), but in a sense less complicated (when in doubt, just use the balanced mount)

notify-when-up's I'm using during these tests. esmft1 is the NFS server, esmf04m is the NFS client:

Notify when the relevant network interface is idle longer than expected (unless the program is done - eyeball that one)	esmft1-root results) notify-when-up -f 'maxtime 60 tethereal -i ce1 -c 100'
Notify when the number of results files is seen growing	esmft1-root results) notify-when-up -g 3 'ls -l | wc -l' -m $[60*30]
Notify when nfs-test is done	esmf04m-root> notify-when-up -s 'bash ./nfs-test'

• avg
• modtime which in turn needs modunits
• highest (which now has the required -s option)

You can e-mail the author with questions or comments: