[Samba] Is Samba Slow?
Brian Whitehead
bwhitehd at earthlink.net
Mon Mar 25 18:45:02 GMT 2002
The dual nics will not double the bandwidth, but it will help with heavy
loads. When one nic is busy the other will share the load. You could try
binding the nics at the os level, but this will only bind them to a single
device, like another machine.
I personally have not done a performance benchmark between these different
NOS'. I have however compared reliability side-by-side. I've experienced
many reliability issues with Netware and Win2K. Several random crashes and
lock ups requiring regular reboots. I've not seen others complain of this
type of performance problem. The first thing I would investigate is the
kernel version, to see if there are any I/O issues. I know there have been
a few versions that have experienced some major I/O issues. The next thing
I would be curious of, is whether the acl patch you're using has any effect
on performance.
Just a few months ago I transferred 40GB of data from a Netware server to
another Netware server and then transferred the same data to a Win2K server
and finally from the Win2K server to a Linux server. The transfer to the
Linux server to a fraction of the time compared to the other transfers and I
did it by using smbclient from the Linux server. But, again I didn't use
anything to measure the transfer rate.
You've got a few factors that could effect I/O in your new system. I'm not
aware of what hardware your older system had, but the processor of your new
system won't be taxed very often, because the IDE harddrive is the
bottleneck. You're also using LVM, which is a lot of overhead. Anything
that handles disk management in software is extra overhead. You might also
want to compare the performance among the different filesystems that Linux
supports, ext2, ext3, XFS, ReiserFS, ...... These are just some of the
major pieces that could have an effect on performance, then summing these up
could cause the performance differences you're having compared to the other
NOS'. I'm not saying the samba doesn't have any performance issues. I just
haven't experienced these problems.
--
Brian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pablo Alcaraz" <pabloa at mbasystems.com.ar>
To: "Brian Whitehead" <bwhitehd at earthlink.net>; "samba"
<samba at lists.samba.org>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Samba] Is Samba Slow?
> Yes, but if I put two ethernet with samba in the same subnet, can I
> duplicate the bandwidth? I mean, statistically the half of the clients
> connect to one card and the half connect to another?
>
> I made perfomance test with win95 clients connected to the same switch
> that the samba server. I copy 1gb file from smb to win95 and viceversa:
>
> smb -> win95: 4.04mb/sec
> win95 -> smb 4.59mb/sec
>
> These numbers are similar as smbclient, and they ar *far* from 8mb/sec
> of ftp transactions from linux clients.
>
> Any idea?
>
> I'll run perfomance test in w2k machine's and ftp transfers too.
>
> Pablo
>
>
> Brian Whitehead wrote:
>
> >Yes you can use multiple nic's with Samba. If I remember, by default it
> >will use all available cards, unless it bound to specific addresses in
> >smb.conf using 'bind interfaces only'.
> >
> >--
> >Brian
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Pablo Alcaraz" <pabloa at mbasystems.com.ar>
> >To: "Wade Winright" <Wwinrigh at thecreek.com>
> >Cc: <samba at lists.samba.org>; "Pablo Alcaraz"
<pabloa at laotraesquina.com.ar>
> >Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:23 PM
> >Subject: Re: [Samba] Is Samba Slow?
> >
> >
> >>I ran it:
> >>
> >>#] mii-tool
> >>eth0: negotiated 100baseTX-FD, link ok
> >>eth1: no link
> >>
> >>eth1 is ok because I do not use it.
> >>By the way, a fool question: Could I use eth1 and eth0, with the *same*
> >>samba server?
> >>
> >>
> >>Wade Winright wrote:
> >>
> >>>RH 7.2 with certain 3com cards seem to have to be modified, or have the
> >>>correct driver installed and then hard coded to 100full. I would run a
> >>>"mii-tool" as root to see what your card is running at.
> >>>Just a suggestion...
> >>>Wade
> >>>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Pablo Alcaraz [mailto:pabloa at mbasystems.com.ar]
> >>>Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:11 AM
> >>>To: samba at lists.samba.org; Pablo Alcaraz
> >>>Subject: [Samba] Is Samba Slow?
> >>>Importance: High
> >>>
> >>>I installed samba 2.2 cvs version in a file server. The configuration
is:
> >>>- AMD k7 1.2Ghz
> >>>- Asus kt133
> >>>- 3 IBM 7200 IDE HD 80 gb with LVM and Ext2/3 volumenes
> >>>- 1gb RAM
> >>>- Redhat 7.2 + kernel 2.4.16 + acl patch
> >>>- 2 Ethernet Card 10/100 3com (but I only use one. Can I use the 2
> >>>cards? How?)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The problem is: Samba is slow (4,5mb/s) compared with Novell (6mb/s),
> >>>Windows (5.5mb/s) or ftp (8mb/s).
> >>>The network benchmark test (netio) that I ran gave me 11.4mb/s
> >>>The disk benchmark (hdbench 0.14.1) gave me 30mb/s read and 27mb/s
write
> >>>
> >>>With the samba test I used smbclient and smbmount from another linux
box
> >>>identical to the server. The volumen was and lvm/ext2 volumen.
> >>>
> >>>I know that samba always is compared with ftp transfers so Why do I get
> >>>only 4.5mb/s if ftp give me 8mb/s?
> >>>The current speed (4.5mb) is not acceptable for us because Novell gave
> >>>us better perfomance with less hardware (pentium II 266mhz).
> >>>
> >>>I have a lot of pressure to upgrade the novell server to the new
> >>>hardware (I wish to replace 2 W2k file servers and 1 Novell server with
> >>>this linux box :-)
> >>>
> >>>If I can not speed up samba at least to 6mb/s (Novell time) I'll have
to
> >>>return to the novell server. And I don't want to do this :-((
> >>>
> >>>Please help!
> >>>
> >>>I send my smb.conf file.
> >>>If you need more information please tell me!
> >>>
> >>>Pablo
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>[global]
> >>> workgroup = MBA
> >>> netbios name = ASGARD
> >>> server string = Samba Server
> >>> security = DOMAIN
> >>> encrypt passwords = Yes
> >>> password server = ntmba
> >>> log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
> >>> log level = 0
> >>> max log size = 2000
> >>> # # socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
> >>> # socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=16384 SO_SNDBUF=16384
> >>> socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_RCVBUF=16384
> >>>SO_SNDBUF=16384
> >>> # socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=32768 SO_SNDBUF=32768
> >>> dns proxy = No
> >>> wins server = 192.168.1.70
> >>> name resolve order = wins host bcast lmhosts
> >>> invalid users = root bin daemon adm sync \
> >>> shutdown halt mail news uucp operator gopher
> >>> printer admin = @mba_administradores
> >>> show add printer wizard = No
> >>> code page directory = /etc/codepages
> >>> time server = Yes
> >>> deadtime = 30
> >>> read size = 32768
> >>>
> >>>[mail]
> >>> available = No
> >>>
> >>>[homes]
> >>> comment = Directorio Personal
> >>> read only = No
> >>> browseable = Yes
> >>>
> >>>[printers]
> >>> comment = Todas las Impresoras
> >>> path = /var/spool/samba
> >>> printable = Yes
> >>> printer admin = @mba_administradores
> >>> browseable = No
> >>> # available = No
> >>>
> >>>[print$]
> >>> path = /usr/local/samba/printers/
> >>> guest ok = No
> >>> browseable = Yes
> >>> read only = Yes
> >>> admin users = @mba_administradores
> >>> write list = @mba_administradores
> >>>
> >>>[pro_sfm]
> >>> comment = \\odin\sfm
> >>> path = /mnt/mba/produ/produ
> >>> valid users = @mba_produ_sfm @mba_sana @mba_desa @mba_admi
> >>>@mba_administradores
> >>> # oplocks = No
> >>> veto oplock files = /*.nfo/*.NFO/*.dbf/*.DBF/*.cdx/*.CDX/*.fpt/*.FPT
> >>> read only = No
> >>> create mask = 0666
> >>> directory mask = 0777
> >>> force group = mba_public
> >>> # write cache size = 1048576
> >>>
> >>> # available = No
> >>> # guest account = mba_produ_sfm
> >>> # guest ok = Yes
> >>> # guest only = Yes
> >>>
> >>> posix locking = No
> >>> wide links = No
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> >>instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
More information about the samba
mailing list