Rex Dieter wrote:
Depeche wrote:
Why slow samba than ftp?
AFAIK, on a local intranet (with few dropped packets), ftp's use of upd
and low protocol overhead means that you'll be hard-pressed to find any
app/protocol that matches or beats it in raw speed.
Exactly, one more reminder that the 1990's are over. When was the last time you saw LAN Times run their yearly NOS wars review comparing the metrics of such products as NetWare, WarpServer, and
something called NT Server. Oh yea, they are not even in print anymore.
The name of the game today is to make the monopoly protocol for file transfer (SMB) as complicated as possible so that competing free / open source products (SAMBA) have a far harder time producing
software which communicates the same language on the wire and can have successful conversations with the closed source SMB implementation and/or only with the competition free / open source
implementation itself. When that is the name of the game, and everyone is buying it, and the majority is not looking at or requesting good performance, then what we are looking at today is how things
turn out.
--
Michael Lueck
Lueck Data Systems
http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/
Remove the upper case letters NOSPAM to contact me directly.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
