, Andrew; Lars Heineken
Cc: Ulf Bertilsson
Subject: RE: Very bad performance when copying large files from windows
to samba-share
I've seen a problem similar to Ulf's. Reading data from a samba share
to a Win2k machine over a GigE network was slow. Turned out that the
app was issuing 64k
Maybe someone could take a look at this ?
On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:13:34 +0200
Lars Heineken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me summarize what we have:
-Win98 doing a write request to the last byte of the file
to be copied
-My machine creates a tempfile of that size and if that
Maybe someone could take a look at this ?
On Tue, 25 Jun 2002 22:13:34 +0200
Lars Heineken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me summarize what we have:
-Win98 doing a write request to the last byte of the file to be copied
-My machine creates a tempfile of that size and if that takes too long
Title: RE: Re: Very bad performance when copying large files from windows to samba-share
Any
good urls to get better understanding of this ? :)
-Original Message-From: Esh, Andrew
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 5:01
PMTo: 'Lars Heineken'; [EMAIL
This the summary:
Most interresting is the gap between the beginning of the transaction and the actual
writing (writing begins at about 45sec)
Any traffic above this point is just minor. After the 45sec the real transfer begins.
As I found no way to search for checksum errors, I didn't found
These are the details from the packets from 16s to 57 s.
Frame 26 (54 on wire, 54 captured)
Arrival Time: Jun 23, 2002 13:34:17.620511000
Time delta from previous packet: 0.7 seconds
Time relative to first packet: 16.173765000 seconds
Frame Number: 26
Packet Length:
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Very bad performance when copying large files from windows
to samba-share
This the summary:
Most interresting is the gap between the beginning of the transaction and
the actual writing (writing begins at about 45sec)
Any traffic above this point is just minor. After
bad performance when copying large files from windows
to samba-share
.. I stumbled over this option before and these are a few Lines from my
smb.conf:
# Security mode. Most people will want user level security. See
# security_level.txt for details.
security = share
write raw
Hi !
Sorry for being late.
I did the ethereal-capturing. What looks very strange on first sight: About 6 of 10
packest are described as: NBSS Continuation Message.
Sometimes there are 6 of them one after another.
Is this normal ?
Regards,
Lars Heineken.
..back again..
I tried the security=share switch - no change
I tried the rawwrite=no switch - no change
the behaviour is absolutely the same.
This is getting annoying.
By the way, I tried moving the file from another PC running win98 and the results were
the same. It definitely depends on
Esh, Andrew wrote:
:
I also have a lot of experience with Win98. There is a performance
problem which is difficult to produce, but large files should still
be copied, albeit slowly. To avoid the performance problem I am
speaking of, make sure you mount the share using the IP address of
the
Title: RE: Very bad performance when copying large files from windows to samba-share
If this were me (and most of you are probably glad it is not), I'd synch the clocks, start Samba at log level 10 (unlimited log size), mount the share from Windows, and let it sit for a few minutes
Lars Heineken wrote:
:
The testparm showed that the setting is no. T be shure, I set it to
no manually but the behavoir hasn't changed.
This is a nasty one, your mail could have been the solution, as your
description of the behaviour was quite what happens here. Maybe
there's a way to check
Lars Heineken wrote:
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:34:10 -0500
Christopher R. Hertel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The next thing to try is a network capture. Do you have TCPDump
(or equivalent) on the system that is running Samba?
As it wasn't available as a packet for my distribution, I
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 15:09:29 -0500
Christopher R. Hertel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don's message reminded me that I am very quick to look at the wire
first. That's a reflex, on my part. I think it would be interesting to
see what happens on the wire, but check the smb.conf setting that Don
15 matches
Mail list logo
