On Monday 01 May 2006 13:25, you wrote:
malcolm wrote:
What dows this mean in /var/log/samba/machine
(apart from everything to do with printing from Windoze to a Linux
printer taking such a long time)?
error packet at smbd/ipc.c(97) cmd=37 (SMBtrans) STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW
You don't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
malcolm wrote:
What dows this mean in /var/log/samba/machine
(apart from everything to do with printing from Windoze to a Linux printer
taking such a long time)?
error packet at smbd/ipc.c(97) cmd=37 (SMBtrans) STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW
You
What dows this mean in /var/log/samba/machine
(apart from everything to do with printing from Windoze to a Linux printer
taking such a long time)?
error packet at smbd/ipc.c(97) cmd=37 (SMBtrans) STATUS_BUFFER_OVERFLOW
Malcolm
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read
hi,
these questions especially go out to greg and collen:
1) (after some windows tweaking, coz windows isn't gb lan ready by
default)
- how did you tweak windows in detail?
2) I can tell you this, if you have the RAID-5 setup not-optimally to work
with the block sizing on your Filesystem
1) google for tools to improve windows lan performance. You do things like
increasing the default window size, the timeout settings, and many others.
You can also tune the Linux network stack as well for high bandwith services
like NFS or samba by searching google.
2a) When I setup my raid-5
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 01:52:29PM -0500, Rohit Kumar Mehta wrote:
I believe I have some hardware or configuration related performance
issues running samba 3.0.14a-3sarge.
Our server is an Intel Celeron 2 Ghz with 512 MB of RAM and a 3ware
card using SATA disks in a RAID 5 configuration
On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 13:52 -0500, Rohit Kumar Mehta wrote:
I believe I have some hardware or configuration related performance
issues running samba 3.0.14a-3sarge.
Our server is an Intel Celeron 2 Ghz with 512 MB of RAM and a 3ware
card using SATA disks in a RAID 5 configuration (3ware
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 02:46:12PM -0500, Rohit Kumar Mehta wrote:
Hi,
The tests were done with BartPE/WindowsXP and with Knoppix 4.0 and
smbmount. Would smbmount perform much different than smbclient?
I can certainly repeat the test using a different client tomorrow.
The Celeron CPU may
Beside the story Greg Folkert wrote (witch make sense)
remember this about GB network carts:
You'll never get a full 1000 mb/s !
i saw you have a celeron processor (witch ain't the fastest in performance)
coz' gb nic's tent to use a lot processor overhead, also raid cards use
(a little)
John H Terpstra wrote:
To add to this info. The last benchmarks I did were in 2003. Within the next
two months I will benchmark a new system that will have dual 3Ware SATA RAID
controllers each with 6 high performance drives in an Opteron system. I am
anxious to see the performance stats,
fastiron
3 x Foundry layer 2 edgeiron
- Original Message -
From: Alexander Lazarevich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Samba] samba 3 performance
Marc,
Thanks for the feedback. I've got a dual 64-bit opteron system (246
PROTECTED]
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:42 PM
Subject: RE: [Samba] samba 3 performance
Marc,
Thanks for the feedback. I've got a dual 64-bit opteron system (246),
going to run FC3, and I'll try to get 75+MB/sec from samba 3 - windows
xp client. I'll let
Yes, I get more than 30MB/s performance. The benchmark I use (NetBench)
is essentially CPU bound, such that a faster processor = faster
performance. With a very fast hardware config (dual 3.2GHz processors),
I've been able to hit around 100MB/s. Changing the RAM or other
attributes does not buy me
Marc,
Thanks for the feedback. I've got a dual 64-bit opteron system (246),
going to run FC3, and I'll try to get 75+MB/sec from samba 3 - windows
xp client. I'll let you know the results.
Alex
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Kaplan, Marc wrote:
Yes, I get more than 30MB/s performance. The benchmark I use
14 matches
Mail list logo
