Samba Performance vs. X-Windows/Telnet
Robin J. Cox
robin.j.cox at mci.com
Thu Oct 23 12:40:00 GMT 1997
I'm a true believer in samba and attempt to induct most people
in my workgroup into using it to map/mount drives to get
thier work done. There are two factions in the work group: those
like me who prefer samba and a direct mount, and those who
prefer an X windows session to run emacs or the SUN common
desktop environment (also an X derivative). We all use some
variation of Windows (95/NT3.5/NT4.0) to access our UNIX
However, it seems lately (especially in the afternoons) the
performance via the samba mount is very slow; I type a key in
the editor and it takes about 2 seconds for it to come back.
I do not see this degradation when connecting to the same
machine through an xterm window or using the vi editor, i.e.,
the slowness comes via the mounting I believe.
Is there a way to tell why there is such a vast difference
in performance and/or to tune samba or the UNIX machine (it
is a SUN SPARC). Would NFS cause this slowness as well?
Unfortunately our NIS department does not support samba; we
(in development) have to do it ourselves.
Thanks very much
Robin J. Cox
Colorado Springs, CO
More information about the samba