I have my Macbook Pro (MacOS Mojave) connecting to an NFS share on a Linux machine directly connected via Thunderbolt with jumbo frames. Testing with iperf3, I can do ~14 Gbps (~1.8 GBps) over the connection, so I expect that network is not the bottleneck.

Here is the /etc/exports:

/srv/share         169.254.0.*(rw,sync,insecure,rw,all_squash,anonuid=1000,anongid=1000,no_subtree_check)

Doing some simple testing with dd, here is what I see:

Direct to disk on the server (~800MB/s)

~$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/testfile bs=5120 count=100000
100000+0 records in
100000+0 records out
512000000 bytes (512 MB, 488 MiB) copied, 0.62477 s, 820 MB/s

NFS from the server (~660 MB/s)

I connected a client on the server to see how it performed with a Linux client and taking the network out of the equation.

$ sudo mount -t nfs -o rw /tmp/share
$ nfsstat -m
/tmp/share from
 Flags: rw,relatime,vers=4.2,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,clientaddr=,local_lock=none,addr=
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/share/test_file bs=5120 count=100000
100000+0 records in
100000+0 records out
512000000 bytes (512 MB, 488 MiB) copied, 0.76516 s, 669 MB/s

From Macbook Pro over Thunderbolt (~150MBps)

I tried to match the default NFS client connection from Linux, but the Mac client doesn't support the same options. I've tried vers=3 and even async, but am never able to get it much faster than this.

$ sudo mount -t nfs -o rw,vers=4,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys /srv/share
$ nfsstat -m
/srv/share from
  -- Original mount options:
     General mount flags: 0x0
     NFS parameters: vers=4,proto=tcp,hard,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys
     File system locations:
       /srv/share @ (
  -- Current mount parameters:
     General mount flags: 0x4000000 multilabel
     NFS parameters: vers=4.0,proto=tcp,port=2049,hard,nointr,noresvport,callback,negnamecache,nonamedattr,noacl,noaclonly,locks,noquota,rsize=65536,wsize=65536,readahead=16,dsize=32768,nordirplus,nodumbtimr,timeo=600,maxgroups=16,acregmin=5,acregmax=60,acdirmin=5,acdirmax=60,nomutejukebox,noephemeral,nonfc,sec=sys
     File system locations:
       /srv/share @ (
     Status flags: 0x0
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=/srv/share/testfile bs=5120 count=10000
10000+0 records in
10000+0 records out
51200000 bytes transferred in 0.337533 secs (151688873 bytes/sec)

Given how fast the network is, it seems like I should be able to get 3-4x the speeds I'm seeing from the Mac. How can I improve the performance?

  • Are all your devices configured for the use of 'jumbo frames' because a mixture of devices configured for jumbo frames and devices not configured for jumbo frames on a network has the potential to cause network performance issues. Aug 31, 2019 at 0:38
  • Yes, both are using jumbo frames gist.github.com/ipmb/c8ca58662685c1b0846351b3102908d6
    – Pete
    Sep 3, 2019 at 18:46
  • Have you tried another data transfer speed test? I find DD on macOS somewhat inaccurate in certain scenarios. Sep 4, 2019 at 0:43
  • I tried to run bonnie++, but the share consistently drops part way through the test. If I just cp a 512MB file, the timings are approx: Direct: 20ms, Local NFS: 180ms, NFS from Mac: 300ms. I also timed the rsync of a large .git directory and got: Direct: 0.2s, Local NFS: 1.2s, NFS from Mac: 3.5s.
    – Pete
    Sep 4, 2019 at 14:33

1 Answer 1


i was having a lot of trouble with both transfer speed to/from an NFS share, as well as extremely slow performance traversing directories; after mounting a share, listing a directory containing just 5 items would take several seconds..
Accessing the same share via smb was much faster..

i finally found a 'fix' that helped me after looking here, here, and here:

Find out which version of NFS protocol is in place on the server; in may case, it's 4.1..

Now, in the file:


add the following line:


Save and restart..
NFS performance should be much improved..

Noting that you change 4.1 in the line above to whatever version of the protocol your NFS server is using..

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .