samba performance difference between old and the latest ?

Namjae Jeon namjae.jeon at samsung.com
Wed Sep 18 00:59:24 UTC 2019


> Thanks so much for getting back to us.  Make sure to catch up with the
> Samba Team at SDC to pin this down further.
WC, Okay:)
> 
> Finally, to ensure I understand your reply correctly:  Is it correct
> that 4.8.12 is 'normal', but 4.9.13 is 'slow'?
The performance of all upper versions included 4.8.12 are degraded.
i.e. 4.7.12 is normal, 4.8.12 ~ 4.11.0 are slow.

Thanks~
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Andrew Bartlett
> 
> On Wed, 2019-09-18 at 09:33 +0900, Namjae Jeon via samba-technical
> wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > I'm sorry I'm late. I forgot because there are many issues this week.
> > I just checked that the performance is degraded from samba 4.8.12.
> > The version I checked is as follows.
> >
> > 4.7.12
> > 4.8.12 <--- performance degration
> > 4.9.13
> > 4.10.6
> > 4.11.0
> >
> > I can look at samba changes more, but I am sorry that I couldn't help
> > you much because of the event(SDC 2019) next week:)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abartlet at samba.org]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 4:33 AM
> > > To: Namjae Jeon
> > > Cc: Namjae Jeon; sergey.senozhatsky at gmail.com; samba-
> > > technical at lists.samba.org
> > > Subject: Re: samba performance difference between old and the latest ?
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2019-09-07 at 14:58 +0900, Namjae Jeon via samba-technical
> > > wrote:
> > > > 2019-09-07 12:20 GMT+09:00, Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical
> > > > <samba-technical at lists.samba.org>:
> > > > > On Fri, 2019-09-06 at 11:01 +0900, Namjae Jeon via samba-technical
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I found something strange during measuring performance with samba
> > > > > > these days.
> > > > > > I checked the performance of samba 4.7.6 and 4.10.6.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > samba 4.7.6 : 11.6MB/s
> > > > > > samba 4.10.6 : 9.5MB/s
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Jumping back to the top of this thread to focus on what you could
> > > > > help
> > > > > us with.  If you built Samba for both of these tests, then perhaps
> > > > > you
> > > > > could do a git bisect between those two versions to work out where
> > > > > this
> > > > > degraded?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I agree to narrow it down.
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course, this assumes it was a single commit, but who knows, it
> > > > > just
> > > > > might be.
> > > > >
> > > > > Either way, if you were able to additionally test 4.7.latest,
> > > > > 4.8.latest, 4.9.latest, 4.11.0rc3 and master (so as to add to the
> > > > > dataset) it would be a massive help.
> > > >
> > > > Hm, okay, I will make time.
> > >
> > > G'Day Namjae,
> > >
> > > I just wondered if you had any more numbers to share with us?
> > >
> > > I know I asked for a lot of work, but we would really appreciate any
> > > insights you have on this.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Andrew Bartlett
> > > --
> > > Andrew Bartlett                       https://samba.org/~abartlet/
> > > Authentication Developer, Samba Team  https://samba.org
> > > Samba Developer, Catalyst IT
> > > https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> --
> Andrew Bartlett
> https://samba.org/~abartlet/
> Authentication Developer, Samba Team         https://samba.org
> Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT
> https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
> 
> 
> 





More information about the samba-technical mailing list