Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 08:41:32 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: sthaug@nethelp.no, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 3com 3c509 card Message-ID: <19971218084132.64227@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <199712171925.MAA04539@usr02.primenet.com>; from Terry Lambert on Wed, Dec 17, 1997 at 07:25:10PM %2B0000 References: <19822.882343067@verdi.nethelp.no> <199712171925.MAA04539@usr02.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 17, 1997 at 07:25:10PM +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >> If you're trying to measure measure network performance, why don't you >> use a tool which is suitable for the job? FTP is definitely not a good >> tool for this job. I'd suggest ttcp or NetPerf. > > Uh, if "typical usage" is FTP, then how is that going to reflect what > he can expect in typical usage? Divide and conquer. It will help determine where the bottleneck is. At the moment, we don't know whether it's ftp or the driver. > A car that can go 120MPH on the test track where there is no more > than a 3% grade, but drops to 5MPH on real roads, is not a good car, > no matter how well it benchmarks. Right. And roads that slow all cars down to 8 km/h aren't good roads, either. We were talking about roads, not cars. Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971218084132.64227>