[Samba] SMB slow by design?

Chris Garrigues 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:


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

512-322-0180                            http://www.trinsics.com

                 Would you rather proactively pay for
                uptime or reactively pay for downtime?

                          Trinsic Solutions
                 Your Proactive IT Management Partner

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 235 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20070201/65512f66/attachment.bin

More information about the samba mailing list