Josh,
Some numbers for that question, I was looking at
ftp rates yesterday because one db was loading slower than
others. ftp reflects network rate, disk rate, cpu if the
box is loaded; the spb box listed below has /tmp on local
disk but /u0* on a gig san. rbox has the slow db. ascii
vs binary is also a factor, adding cr's to lf's must take
a lot of cycles.
Max rate on 100 mbit network is ~ 12 m/sec. The
below numbers are k/sec, the test file was 8 m. These
boxes are all on the same switch; rbox is winnt, spb is aix,
idbox and dbox are solaris.
--
Dave Toal
Systems reenignE "Go not to the wizards for advice,
Thomson & Thomson for they will say both yes and no."
N. Quincy, MA
starting on rbox, ftp to spb
spb:/u01
get 1122, 913, 812
put 735, 459, 717
spb:/u05
get 1066, 771, 700
put 759, 665, 397
spb:/tmp
get 901, 943, 806
put 365, 343, 471
starting on rbox, ftp to idbox
idbox:/tmp
get 919, 624, 830
put 610, 439, 511
starting on idbox, ftp to spb
spb:/u01
get 3975, 3988, 3923
put 5261, 5166, 5112
spb:/tmp
get 3922, 3853, 3956
put 2480, 2600, 2528
starting on spb, ftp to idbox
spb:/tmp
get 2534, 2420, 2375
put 4488, 4568, 4577
spb:/u01
get 7102, 6980, 7086
put 4609, 4624, 4512
starting on idbox, ftp to dbox
ftp> bin
8561290 bytes received in 0.75 seconds (11216.77 Kbytes/s)
8561290 bytes received in 0.79 seconds (10614.58 Kbytes/s)
ftp> ascii
8561298 bytes received in 2.2 seconds (3782.33 Kbytes/s)
8561298 bytes received in 2.1 seconds (3958.73 Kbytes/s)
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12/20/02 3:46 PM
Subject: BBLISA: FTP puzzler
I have a truly puzzling ftp question. Between heterogenous platforms, I
am
seeing radically different ftp performance when doing puts than when
doing
gets. I am seeing this in two separate instances
Instance #1) From my NT desktop to our P390 Mainframe Emulator I can do
an
FTP put of a 100MB file relatively quickly. A get from the mainframe to
my
PC of the same file runs extremely slow or hangs altogether. We have
experimented with adjusting MTU size, full or half duplex, etc., to no
useful effect.
Instance #2) From a solaris box in our US office to a solaris box in our
UK
office we see radically different times for puts and gets. A put
inititated
in our US office to the UK server takes about twice as long as a get of
the
same file back from the UK office.
In this second instance, we have have two connections to our UK office,
a
128k direct frame link and a 2Mbit ATM link that is shared with our
other
European offices. All TCP connections initiated in the US office flow
over
the 128k frame link. All connections initiated in the UK office flow
over
the 2MBit shared ATM link. FTP transfers initiated from the UK office to
the
US office (solaris to solaris, again) take the longest of all, about 3
times
as long as the gets initiated from the US side.
What is going on here? Why in the local office from desktop to
mainframe
are puts faster than gets and why on the slower frame link from US to UK
are
puts always faster than gets?
Is there some wierdness with the FTP protocol or with individual
implementations of FTP that I am not understanding?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
:)
Joshua Putnam
Sr. Systems Administrator
Ascential Software, Inc.
---
Send mail for the `bblisa' mailing list to `[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.
Mail administrative requests to `[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.
---
Send mail for the `bblisa' mailing list to `[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.
Mail administrative requests to `[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.
