Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:01:04 +0000
From:      Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
To:        Andrew.Gordon@net-tel.co.uk
Cc:        eivind@dimaga.com, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: IPFW + Samba -> performance problem 
Message-ID:  <199701160001.AAA15119@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:09:29 GMT." <"45f6-970114231001-B849*/G=Andrew/S=Gordon/O=NET-TEL Computer  Systems Ltd/PRMD=NET-TEL/ADMD=Gold 400/C=GB/"@MHS>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
[.....]
> 
> I haven't hit this exact problem, but I did spend a long time looking
> at tcpdump output some while ago to explain variable _read_ performance
> we were seeing - all the old client machines (mostly 486s) had been working
> fine, but a new P120 client was much slower than the other machines
> at reading from Samba.  It turned out that TCP_NODELAY was the solution
> (and at the time the FreeBSD port of Samba was missing a #include
> so that the -O TCP_NODELAY option didn't work!).  Perhaps an explanation
> of what I found will help diagnose your problem.

[Explaination deleted]

> Andrew Gordon.

Nice one !  Looks like TCP_NODELAY makes about a 100-400% improvement here !

-- 
Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>, <brian@freebsd.org>
      <http://www.awfulhak.demon.co.uk/>;
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701160001.AAA15119>