The other important (IMO) thing about using ttcp is that it cuts out disk and I/O related bottlenecks, so you really are only testing your "raw" network speed.
ray On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Shannon Roddy wrote: > If you want to do some "raw" benchmarking, you should look into nttcp. > This will give you your "theoretical" max on the network. We use it > all the time to test just about everything. The advantage is that it > will cut out the overhead of higher protocols like samba, ftp, etc. > and give you a true view of the network speed rather than the protocol > speed. > > http://www.leo.org/~elmar/nttcp/ > > > On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 03:03:47 -0500, James Kuhns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I went ahead and rolled out the 1000Mb network this weekend. Came up with a > > procedure to attempt to benchmark the file copy performance between my two > > main machines before and after the roll out. I basically used both ftp and > > samba mounts to transfer files between the two machines on my net. Got a > > puzzling anomaly with the benchmark stats. > > > > It looks like a samba file copy (RH 9 box -> WinXP SP2) is way slower on the > > 1000Mb than it was on the 100Mb (the 100Mb looks to be about 1.5 times > > faster than the 1000Mb), everything else is about what I expected (~2 to 3 > > times faster, with ftp being significantly faster than samba). I reran the > > benchmark and got basically the same results so I did a few copies by hand > > and got roughly the same as the benchmark. > > > > Anyone know what could cause this? I'm thinking maybe an old version of > > samba (I think it's at 3.0.5 and the one on the box is only at 2.2.8a)... > > The RH box is about to be wiped and Woody put on it, I'll rerun the > > benchmark afterwards and see if the anomaly is still there. > > > > Here's a link to the benchmark procedure and the last set of results > > http://www.kuhns-la.com:9080/netbenchmark.html - notice the PULL stats in > > the "Results: SAMBA File Copy Throughput in MB/s" section, averaged 5.774 > > MB/s on 100Mb and only 3.868 MB/s on 1000Mb. ?????? > > > > Sorry for the messy html - I was using Excel to compute the stats so I just > > exported it from Excel as html. > > > > If anyone wants the benchmark scripts let me know. > > > > James > > > > _______________________________________________ > > General mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ray DeJean http://www.r-a-y.org Systems Engineer Southeastern Louisiana University IBM Certified Specialist AIX Administration, AIX Support =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
