John H Terpstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Me wrote:
>
>> > Did you check the impact of increasinf the SO_RECVBUF and SO_SNDBUF
>> > to 128KByte?
>>
>> No I have not. I will try it though. I have 512MB of RAM in my
>> server so I'm not too worried about memory.
>
> Let me know what you find.
Okay, here is a list of my recient test results. If you want more, just
let me know.
Date Source Destination Amount of Data in megabytes Time in
seconds Speed of Xfer in mb/min Speed of Xfer in MB/sec
Used speedtest.tar.bz2.
3/17/03 /dev/hdd wyonker 1972.375 328 360.80 6.01
I did an ftp transfer as a baseline test. Booted to my Linux
partition.
3/17/03 /dev/hdc wyonker 1972.375 632.40 10.54
Used speedtest.tar.bz2
3/17/03 /dev/hdc nyonker 1972.375 268 441.58 7.36
Another FTP transfer
3/17/03 /dev/hdc nyonker 1972.375 199 606.50 10.11
Used speedtest.tar.bz2. Changed to socket options = TCP_NODELAY
SO_RCVBUF=131072 SO_SNDBUF=131072
3/17/03 /dev/hdc nyonker 1972.375 263 449.97 7.50
Used directory Changed to socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=131072
SO_SNDBUF=131072
3/17/03 /dev/hdc nyonker 2,026 288 422.04 7.03
Used speedtest.tar.bz2. Changed to socket options = TCP_NODELAY
IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192
SO_SNDBUF=8192
3/17/03 /dev/hdc nyonker 2,026 277 438.80 7.31
Used speedtest directory. Changed to socket options = TCP_NODELAY
IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192
SO_SNDBUF=8192
3/17/03 /dev/hdc nyonker 2,026 286 424.99 7.08
7.5MB/sec doesn't seem too bad. But I still think I can do better. I may
lower my standards a little. If I can get to 8 or 8.5MB/sec I'll be happy.
I still think I should be able to do 9MB/sec. FTP can do 10.5MB/sec. Does
Samba really have 30% more overhead than FTP?
File locking and such are not issues since I've been doing test with both
directories of files and one big zip.
Any other suggestions would be much appreicated.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
