Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 09:36:39 +0100 (CET) From: Martin Welk <mw@freibergnet.de> To: Mike Muir <mmuir@es.co.nz> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG, Greg Lewis <glewis@trc.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: Samba Performance Message-ID: <XFMail.991208093639.mw@freibergnet.de> In-Reply-To: <384DC4D4.99AB4960@es.co.nz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08-Dec-99 Mike Muir wrote:
() smb: \incoming\> put #math.xchatlog
() putting file #math.xchatlog as \incoming\#math.xchatlog (107.262 kb/s)
() (average 107.262 kb/s)
() smb: \incoming\> get #math.xchatlog
() getting file #math.xchatlog of size 2692307 as #math.xchatlog (1021.84
() kb/s)
() (average 1021.84 kb/s)
Somewhere in the Usenet somebody said, that the generic answer to such
a question is to always increase the receive/send buffers for the
socket. Look at [g|s]etockopt(2) for more information.
I have added
socket options = IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY SO_SNDBUF=262144 \
SO_RCVBUF=262144
(I'm not sure if 256k is really needed, I left it because there are
some Windows boxes connected to the Samba server and I haven't tried
if there's a difference - with 128k I experienced same speed as it's
now with only one machine. But the raising speed was highly noticeable,
especially when copying many many small files!)
() >From speeds increased (quite a bit.. now we're talking :) but upload
() (incoming) speeds still suck ass.. hrmph.
That's it without increased buffers.
Gruß,
Martin
--
FreibergNet Systemhaus GbR Martin Welk * Sales, Support
Systemhaus für Daten- und Netzwerktechnik phone +49 3731 781387
Unternehmensgruppe Liebscher & Partner fax +49 3731 781377
D-09599 Freiberg * Am St. Niclas Schacht 13 http://www.freibergnet.de/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.991208093639.mw>