The server definately is. The switch should be, but I will have to confirm. Thanks for the idea!
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Michael B. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, the first question I always ask - are the ports locked at speed/duplex > on both the server NICs and the switch ports? > > Regards, > > Michael B. Smith > MCSE/Exchange MVP > http://TheEssentialExchange.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 12:27 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: [Robo]copy performance issue > > Hi everyone, > > I"m seeing something peculiar with robocopy, and quite the opposite of > anything I have seen before or would expect. I am performing a simple > robocopy mirror copy between two servers. When these servers were > attached to different uplinked switches, copy time/performance was as > expected. > > I recently moved one of the servers so that it is connected to the > same switch, and apparently all copy-related performance has become > abismal - with network utilization staying below 1% ! Previously, > when connected to an up-linked switch, the utilization would peak > close to 50% during a large file copy. This happens with robocopy as > well as an Windows GUI copy. > > The switches involved are Cisco 3560's. Both servers are currently > attached to the same, while with the prior placement one of the > servers was attached to a different 3560 that is up-linked via SFP. > > I'm currently at a loss as to why this is occuring. Any suggestions/ideas? > > TIA! > > -- > ME2 > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > -- ME2 ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
