| 1 |
One more thing. The file transfer speed is |
| 2 |
min(max(HDD),max(NIC),max(others)) so it will depend on your HDD, your |
| 3 |
network and other reasons. I find out that using sftp command seem to be |
| 4 |
faster than NFS or Samba. Could you try sftp and check if it is faster |
| 5 |
or not? Then check the dmesg as well as network cables to see if there |
| 6 |
is any problem. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Hung |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
On 01/18/10 05:46, Dan Cowsill wrote: |
| 11 |
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Stroller |
| 12 |
> <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
>> Hi there, |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> Yesterday I reseated the network cable between my server cupboard and my |
| 17 |
>> desk, and it now lights up on the switch by my desk as gigabit. But a |
| 18 |
>> file-transfer today is slower than I might have hoped. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> I'm not ruling out the cable, because it's pretty beat up (but the switch |
| 21 |
>> *is* lighting up as 1000), but how do I determine, please, that the Linux |
| 22 |
>> server at the other end is recognising the NIC and negotiating as gigabit |
| 23 |
>> speeds? |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> The hard-drives on the server are using an older PCI SATA card, and the NIC |
| 26 |
>> is also PCI. But I would have expected it to be a bit faster than 100Mbps. |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
>> Any estimates over what kind of speed I should be seeing for large |
| 29 |
>> file-transfers over Samba? Wildly ball-park is fine - I wouldn't expect a |
| 30 |
>> 10x speed increase, but maybe 2x or 3x - 4x would be great! |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>> I'll be testing between my Macs (both on the desktop switch, ruling out both |
| 33 |
>> the Linux box and the suspicious cable) later today, I'd just like some |
| 34 |
>> ideas of where I should be starting from. |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> Right now I'm seeing 10 gigs of .mp4 files (1gb - 2gb per video file) taking |
| 37 |
>> about an hour - that's about what I'd expect from old 100Mbps networking, |
| 38 |
>> not this shiny new stuff. |
| 39 |
>> |
| 40 |
>> I'm not seeing any difference commenting & uncommenting "aio read size = 1, |
| 41 |
>> aio write size = 1" (separate lines) from /etc/samba/smb.conf and then |
| 42 |
>> running `/etc/init.d/samba reload`, but maybe I shouldn't expect that to |
| 43 |
>> make any difference on an existing transfer. I just don't want to interfere |
| 44 |
>> with this right now - I just want to copy as much as possible on to my |
| 45 |
>> laptop before I go out, and I'll take a look at this performance issue when |
| 46 |
>> I get home. |
| 47 |
>> |
| 48 |
>> Thanks in advance for any suggestions or pointers, |
| 49 |
>> |
| 50 |
>> Stroller. |
| 51 |
>> |
| 52 |
>> |
| 53 |
>> |
| 54 |
>> |
| 55 |
> In all likelihood, its your hard disk slowing down the network |
| 56 |
> transfer, and not the cabling. Generally speaking, if the hardware |
| 57 |
> says gigabit, than you've got gigabit. |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
> |
Archives