Samba performance compared to Windows 98
kpayne at cirvisinc.com
Fri Nov 3 00:01:19 GMT 2000
> -----Original Message-----
> From: samba-admin at us5.samba.org [mailto:samba-admin at us5.samba.org]On
> Behalf Of Johann Zuschlag
> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 5:27 PM
> To: samba at samba.org; 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
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.
> Johann Zuschlag
> zuschlag at online.de
More information about the samba