Michaelwagner Wrote: > When I first got my slug, I recall doing a lot of benchmarking. I got > vastly different results from my win98 box and my w2k box. The win98 > box is about 1/3 the speed but accessed the slug disk at about 5 times > the speed of the w2k box. > IIRC the problem was the setting of one of the tcp parameters, like > windowsize. Which comes about because the slug pretends to be some > other device, some unknown version of windows NT or something, and w2k > tries to be all smart about negotiating with it and it fails to > understand what the slug can and can't do and messes up window size. > The win98 box had no such preconceived notions, didn't try to negotiate > with the slug, and so didn't fall into the trap the slug ppl had left > for them. > When I upgrades to the most recent Linksys release, R63 I think, the > one that supports FAT32, I didn't notice the same performance problem. > But I've only played with it a bit (the slug isn't in constant use - > based on the first set of results, I went another way). So maybe the > networking glitch got fixed. > > More research is, I guess, necessary. > > I'm hopeful, with some of the modifications that are being made now to > the Slimserver and some that will come in the next major release, that > the lower-level, device-driver-like functions of Slimserver can run on > a hardware-unmodified slug and the higher levels over the network on > some other host, or even on a second unmodified slug sitting beside the > first one. That would be an ideal situation, for me at least and > hopefully for many others. > > Then, a slimserver could well be a slugfarm consisting of 2 $100 slugs, > a $100 wired/wireless router and a $200 USB hard disk. Now that they're > making stand-up routers and standup hard disks, they'd just look like 4 > little boxes standing together. Could look kinda cool.
Michael, When I wrote about slow directory browsing of a mounted NSLU2 disk from an XP box, I failed to take into account that the disk was getting hammered at the time by FLAC doing its compression thing on a number of files. I'm not sure that any disk would respond too quickly under those conditions. When the disk is quiet, the perceived speed seems similar to the W2K box browsing the same mounted disk, which is to say, it seems fine. I am running a stock NSLU2. It's not unslung. I'm running the R63 version of the firmware. Whether or not its actual thoughput is up to the standards of the fastest internal drives is a non-issue in this case. It doesn't take much bandwidth to serve up a FLAC file. I'm completely satisfied using an NSLU2 to manage the storage of my music files. (I don't think I'd run SlimServer from it, however.) -- jonheal Jon Heal says: Have a nice day! http://www.theheals.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ jonheal's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2133 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19781 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
