[Samba] SMB slow by design?
cwg-dated-1170792333.b7fd15 at Trinsics.Com
Thu Feb 1 20:05:32 GMT 2007
> From: Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org>
> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 09:56:25 -0800
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:47:59AM -0600, James A. Dinkel wrote:
> > I don't know why, but I just tried this, removind the SNDBUF AND RCVBUF,
> > and the file share does seem snappier. I had never messed with these
> > options, I just found several places that said setting these to 8192
> > gave a performance increase, so I had always used them. Not any more.
> The trouble with the Internet is that really old advice never dies :-).
I just looked in my own config files and found:
socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192 IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_KEEPALIVE
I removed SO_RCVBUF and SO_SNDBUF.
Of course, I have no idea why any of these were defined in the first place.
Should any of the others be removed as well?
Chris Garrigues Trinsic Solutions
President 710-B West 14th Street
Austin, TX 78701-1755
Would you rather proactively pay for
uptime or reactively pay for downtime?
Your Proactive IT Management Partner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 235 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20070201/65512f66/attachment.bin
More information about the samba