| 1 |
On 1/15/21 2:58 AM, Michael wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday, 15 January 2021 08:42:16 GMT bobwxc wrote: |
| 3 |
>> 在 2021/1/15 下午4:27, Raffaele BELARDI 写道: |
| 4 |
>>>> -----Original Message----- |
| 5 |
>>>> From: bobwxc <bobwxc@××.com> |
| 6 |
>>>> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 08:57 |
| 7 |
>>>> To: gentoo-user@l.g.o |
| 8 |
>>>> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] network transfer speed |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
>>>> 在 2021/1/15 下午2:56, thelma@×××××××××××.com 写道: |
| 11 |
>>>>> On both of my systems the network card speed is showing 1000 |
| 12 |
>>>>> cat /sys/class/net/enp4s0/speed 1000 |
| 13 |
>>>>> |
| 14 |
>>>>> but when I do rsync larage file I only see about: 20 to 22MB/s On my |
| 15 |
>>>>> home network I get about 110MB/s between PC's |
| 16 |
>>>>> |
| 17 |
>>>>> Both PC's have SSD and the swith is Gigabit (I think). |
| 18 |
>>>>> How to find a the bottleneck? |
| 19 |
>>>> |
| 20 |
>>>> 1000Mbps network card's maximum theoretical speed is about 125MiB/s. |
| 21 |
>>>> It only works in short distances. |
| 22 |
>>> |
| 23 |
>>> Correct but that's the line speed that you'll never reach, when you take |
| 24 |
>>> into account Ethernet frame overhead, IP (and possibly TCP) header |
| 25 |
>>> overhead and application ( rsync, FTP, SMB, NFS) overhead you get lower |
| 26 |
>>> figures. In my experience 900Mbps (110MiBps) on a 1000Mbps line is more |
| 27 |
>>> realistic for 'normal' transfers. |
| 28 |
>> Yes, you are right. So it is just *theoretical* speed :-) |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
>> I don't know where does the file he sync from. |
| 31 |
>> If you sync a file from a server in other city, for a 20 to 22MB/s speed |
| 32 |
>> is very normal. But if in home, that is not good. |
| 33 |
>> |
| 34 |
>> And for ftp and rsync. |
| 35 |
>> ftp is better for transferring a single large file once. |
| 36 |
>> rsync is better for a long-term, incremental synchronization. The |
| 37 |
>> file verification of rsync may take a lot of time for first sync. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> There is a theoretical network speed as already mentioned. There is a |
| 40 |
> protocol speed, which may limit throughput if it has e.g. heavy encryption/ |
| 41 |
> compression and the CPU is anaemic. Finally, there is a MoBo bus (SCSI/SATA/ |
| 42 |
> USB) and the media storage limit. If using USB 1.1 or 2.0 and/or the disks |
| 43 |
> are slow or experience write amplification, you'll find this will constrain |
| 44 |
> the final transfer speed significantly. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
The computers on this network are 2-meters apart and they both use SSD Drive (so USB limitation doesn't come under consideration). |
| 47 |
Like I said, on my home network when I transfer the 24GB file I get about 110MiBps transfer, so I was expecting the same in remote location). |
| 48 |
Some units are connected to a router Ausus RT-AC66U B1 but these ports are gigabit too. |
Archives