On Feb 6, 2008 4:19 AM, Felipe Martinez Hermo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Sinisa Bandin escribió: > > > > > > Felipe Martinez Hermo wrote: > >> > >>>> OK, so we're apples to apples, so to speak; the servers are tuned > >>>> the same. I'll assume your disks are tuned from hdparm and up to > >>>> snuff, otherwise you wouldn't be tuning sockets ;). Did your old > >>>> server have samba settings for oplocks set? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Peace and Blessings, > >>>> -Scott. > >>>> > >>>> "Of course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong" > >>>> -Dennis Miller > >>> Erm, sorry, I didn't catch that you had 2 .conf files there. I'm > >>> back to the drawing board. Sorry about that. Anyone else have any > >>> ideas? > >> Yes, that's whats shocking me. Apparently we're apples to apples. > >> Except for the kernel (new&slow 2.6.18-4-686 vs old&fast 2.6.8) > >> > >> I've sniffed both eth0 interfaces and I've got some more information. > >> When talking to the slow server, the client needs to send 76 "TCP > >> segment of a reassembled PDU" that are not sent when talking to the > >> old and fast server. > >> > >> How can I workaround this issue? Should I lower server's MTU? How much? > >> > >> Thank you > > Do you happen to have a Realtek 8169 based gigabit ethernet in new > > server? > > > > If you do, I had the same problem several times last year, and solved > > all of them by changing motherboards (all were integrated, and I like > > them to stay that way because I can achieve full gigabit speed with > > several concurent clients) > > > > Best regards, > > Sinisa Bandin > > > > > > No, machines are out-of-the-box HP DL servers: > Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5705_2 Gigabit > Ethernet (rev 03) > > I've made a spreadsheet with summarizing wireshark results and comparing > results for both servers. You can see it here: > http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pnLL2fInqFq2YKuZIphtQdA > > It's meaningful that fast server makes 406 Trans2 calls, while slow > server makes 616 calls to perform the same operation. The difference is > mainly in QUERY_PATH_INFO (200 vs 305) and FIND_FIRST2 (94 vs 199) calls. > > Next try: change ethernet wire? :-? > > > -- > ============================== > Felipe Martínez Hermo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ============================== > Servicios Informáticos > UGT Galicia > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ============================== > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba > Hrm, are you using SACKs or DSACKs or tcp_low_delay in /proc/sys/net/somethingOrOther? They didn't change congestion control default in your upstream kernel, did they? Should be "reno" by default. Doing a netstat -a, do you have many packets queued in either direction? This one is puzzling me. -- Peace and Blessings, -Scott. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
