Samba performance compared to Windows 98

Kim Payne kpayne at
Fri Nov 3 00:01:19 GMT 2000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: samba-admin at [mailto:samba-admin at]On
> Behalf Of Johann Zuschlag
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 5:27 PM
> To: samba at; Tim J Lanza
> Subject: Re: Samba performance compared to Windows 98
> Hi Tim,
That was a typo, right?  :)

> The odd value is NOT the network transfer rate. Its just the
> cache transfer rate. It is like this:

I kinda figured it wasn't, but I was performing the tests in the same manner
in all cases.  I copied the file, then deleted it and copied it again.  I
did this for 6 trials for every test and averaged the results.  In some
cases, the times did get faster with each trial and other cases it didn't.

> Another point is, if you use Netbeui for a pure windows
> connection, you get faster transfer rates. What were you using?

We did have Netbeui installed as a protocol, but I've removed it when I
installed Linux on the network.

> With tcp/ip you are tunneling SMB
> thru tcp/ip which is slower. On the other hand pure tcp/ip is
> faster. Samba uses tcp/ip only. Usually you get the maximum using
> ftp. Did you try to ftp?

Yeah, the ftp numbers were 10-20% faster than using Samba on the same
machine as the Using Samba book says it should be.  I was just trying to
justify to my boss we should migrate to a  client/server setup.  It didn't
look good to him when I installed Linux and performance slightly decreased.
That's my fault for not testing it enough though.

> Hope that helps a little bit. Anyway your transfer rates are not
> 200% slower. Usualy a Samba machine should have the same rates
> like an NT server, or
> better.

Yeah, thanks for all the help.  It used to be slower than it is now, but
with the suggestions, I was able to improve it some.


> regards
> Johann
> Johann Zuschlag
> zuschlag at

More information about the samba mailing list