> I'm installing a samba setup on a MP 3000. I've got it up and running ok
> now but I still have to convince the NT boys that this is a good idea.
Well, they _want_ to be hard to convince.
> But I'm running into a problem. A NT guy did a test. He copied a large dir
> to the samba and to a NT server at the same time. The samba server did
> twice as long over the copy :-(
>
> So I tested the speed of the Linux partition with bonnie++. I've got a
> transfer speed of about 5MB/sec. Thats slower then a 100Mb ethernet link.
AFIAK the MP-3000 uses SSA drives in a RAID5 arrangement,
which, I'll bet, the NT box ain't. I've got a P/390E in my
server closet that I handle the care and feeding of (network
wise) but I've learned enough about it's configuration- and
despite high performance drives, it all goes through RAID5
in SCSI.
This definately improves RAS but doesn't look so good when
dealing with performance.
What was the speed differential when reading from the MP3000?
> Is this a normal speed? I hope not.
I'm assuming you're using an LPAR- because VM has it's own
penalties.
What's it look like when you shove something big at /dev/null?
Is the bottleneck in network throughput or in writing to disk?
> Is this a Linux problem? (currently running 2.2.16 and ext2)
> Do you have suggestions to improve the diskspeed ?
Someone who really _knows_ the MP3000 would need to comment
here; What little I know of the P/390E indicates that you'd
need to be an OS|2 maven to tune the I/O system, but I believe
that the MP3000 only uses OS|2 for managing the console and
doesn't handle disk I/O for the main CPs.
--
John R. Campbell Speaker to Machines [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- As a SysAdmin, yes, I CAN read your e-mail, but I DON'T get that bored!
Disclaimer: All opinions expressed above are those of John R. Campbell
alone and are seriously unlikely to reflect the opinions of
his employer(s) or lackeys thereof. Anyone who says
differently is itching for a fight!
