Jacky Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I trid 20,000 files in a directory too, and found the same result: > Windows's share is about 10 times faster than Linux/samba's one > when get small file's property(NOT content).
Jacky, Not all Linux filesystems are created equally, especially for this kind of file access method. Ext2/Ext3 is probably the slowest filesytem for this kind of thing. I have seen some glimpses of directory hashing being retrofitted into ext2/ext3, but this requires a format-time option with very new tools, with new mount/kernels, etc. You'd be MUCH better off with reiserfs. I've had 500,000 files in a single directory without a significant decrease in performance. I've never managed to get Windows 2000 to manage this without really tanking in performance [I've given up the test harness long before it got that far]. I don't think you'll ever see samba outperforming Windows in this though, because of the case-insensitivity issue, though it should at least match the performance. Reiserfs may provide other benefits (superior access locality) which MIGHT boost performance a bit towards Linux/Samba, but I'd not hold my breath. =MB= -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
