Brian Krusic wrote:
Yes, I have this too. It was my first idea to use samba, but I did not expectHi,
I've set it up for this purpose with a max sustained throughput of ~25-30MB/sec (megabytes). This was using p-ide on the backend and 3ware cards with RH9 and xfs and a mix of raid5 and raid10 (1+0).
that samba is that slow. (Okay, windows server is even slower)
This was with a gig e (non jumbo capable) network and tricks like increased TCP window sizes and the typical Samba tricks like TCP no delay etc...
However even with NetApps or BlueArcs (both with fiber channel on the backend @ raid4), the sustained throughput according to my bro at R&H was like 45MB/sec.
There are several things to consider like;
- whats doing the file serving (fiber, ide, raid or striped)
http://www.lustre.org/ It a parallel filesystem over network. (currenlty GiGE) Current benchmarks show that you do not need to worry about bandwidth on that part.
- is it an OS or an appliance - is the net topology ethernet - is it gig e with jumbo frames - can the client handle that throuput
Choosing a backend is key as well as your net topology.
Also, look into http://www.myri.com/ for a fast topology. For disk i/o look into http://www.pvfs.org/.
Or quadrics for network: http://www.quadrics.com/.
Quadrics for example is capable of doing 1GB/s. But currently samba is the bottleneck.
At least the benchmarks I found on the net were all (much) below < 100 MB/s, so I wanted to ask, if this is really true ?
regards,
Martin
-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
