I benchmarked the "raw" speed using ttcp and a windows port of ttcp called wsttcp before I benchmarked the file transfers (I didn't post those results). I used the -s option in ttcp to take the drives out of the equation as much as possible. Throughput averaged ~11.4MB/s over 100Mb and ~60.4MB/s over 1000Mb (no matter which direction).
I purposely added the overhead of the transfer protocols and I/O into the benchmark stats because I wanted a more realistic picture of what kind of improvement 1000Mb gave me when transfering files (the primary reason I went to 1000Mb). The "raw" speed numbers were neat to have but they didn't give me enough data about the specific task I was planning to use the network for. According to the "raw" stats the 1000Mb is ~5 times faster than 100Mb, when in actuallity I'm only going to see it running ~2-3 times faster when I'm using it (unless I'm pulling through samba). The protocol and I/O are the limiting factors over 1000Mb whereas over 100Mb the network speed is the limiting factor. James > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of -ray > Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 10:49 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: 1000Mb vs. 100Mb benchmark anomaly was RE: > [brlug-general]networking ignorance > > > 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 > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net >
