similar to: Samba slower than FTP?

Hello, I have a file server under Debian Lenny, with a 41TB file system (XFS, 24 x 2TB hard drives on RAID 6 on an Areca card) Reading files with ftp works like a charm and we easily reach the 125 MB/s limit of the GB ethernet card. But when reading files (on the same clients) from a samba share, we get around 60 MB/s. Clients are Windows XP 64 and Seven 64 and show the same performances.

hello everyone, we have an SUN E450 server with soalris 2.6 and 512mb RAM running samba. we have a network and all the machines are connect through a switch. there are about 40 users who simultaneously use the server running samba for file service. The set up is like this. there is an application on the server which is shared and all the users have mapped their drive letter to that share. this

I am currently investigating using samba on a Linux box to provide file server services on our NT LAN (I'm a bit sick of NT doing dummy spits on me). I'm running RH5.1, and have just upgraded samba to samba-1.9.18p8-51.3 (using the rpm from http://samba.anu.edu.au/samba/ftp/Binary_Packages/redhat/RPMS/5.1/samba- 1.9.18p8-51.3.i386.rpm) The setup includes several NT servers, one set up as

samba@samba.org ????????: > SAMBA Digest 2226 > >For information on unsubscribing see http://samba.org/listproc/ >Topics covered in this issue include: > > 1) RE: weird printing problems. > by "cbrink" <cbrink@allsportssupply.com> > 2) Re: weird printing problems. > by "John J. LeMay Jr." <jlemay@njmc.com> > 3) Connection

overall the same as the old stuff, but with better namings and tirivialy improved code here and there Karol Herbst (9): pci: add gk104 variant pci: add gf106 variant pci: implement generic code for PCIe speed change pci: implement pcie speed change for tesla pci: implement pcie speed change on Fermi pci: implement PCIe speed change for kepler+ bios/perf: parse the pci speed from the

Dear readers, S-Plus have a rts function (Regular Time Series), which is used like so: fveks<-read.csv('http://louise.hoffman.googlepages.com/veks.csv',header=TRUE,sep=',') attach(fveks) acf(ts.intersect(rts(HC.f),rts(Ta.f),rts(GR.f),rts(W.f))) Warning the csv file is 750kB. Can the same be done in R? Lots of love =) Louise

overall it is for the most part the same as my older version. I cleaned up some copyright things, so that it is more like the others. Also I moved the print about the max speed supported into preinit and did some other minor cleanups in the 3rd commit. Happy testing (and performance for prime offloading setups) Karol Herbst (9): pci: add gk104 variant pci: add gf106 variant pci: implement

SVR Debian sid V. 3.4.2-1 CLI Debian lenny ===================== Hi list, Sometimes ago I noticed a samba slowing down but as I don't use it very much it was not a PB (NO conf changes.) Today I made this test on CLI: mount -t cifs //svr/myshare /mnt/ -o username=myuser,password=mypw,ro then: cp /mnt/films/20090911_0025_footage.avi . (this one's 2GB) The speed (measured w/ iptraf) is

Hi, I am seeing that doc = index[''mykey''] index.update ''mykey'', doc is about 10 times slower than doc = Document.new doc[''id''] = ''mykey'' index << doc It looks like #update is _much_ slower that #<<. Is it as expected? Sergei. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

We have some code that uses REXML, that when executed outside of Rails as a standalone rb file, runs fine. Once we run the code inside of Rails, it is dog slow. I know REXML is slow, buggy, sucks, etc., but my question is what cause the performance to degrade like that. Thanks. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Is Samba typically slower sending files than receiving? I have seen this both at home and at work. Sometimes the throughput is 1/2 when I copy files from Samba than when I copy to Samba (From WinNT and Win95/98) The Players -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have been playing with the options for three days. I have an NT server that is old.

hi folks, we had a nice old compaq Prosignia300 server - Pentium75 but nice architecture. It won't serve as a workstation but from what I read of linux and samba it should have done very well as a server on our win95 network. However, after setting all the win95 boxes up with tcp/ip to see the samba server, and copying all our medical databases across, we found that the response time

Author: perrin Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: a593e64c4739242e2eb3a43ea296996000af0c2d Log message: 6413731 pathologically slower fsync on 32 bit systems Files: update: usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs/sys/zil.h update: usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs/zil.c

my environment. vmware 6.5. workstation 2.6.32.25-xen when make linux-2.6-pvops-build is very slowly. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

Hi, On a vista pc we run Syncrosvn client to check out svn repositories to a samba share. It works but on Vista this takes much longer than on windows xP. Checkout or status check on local disk work normally. (tried the same on a different vista pc, same problem..) To troubleshoot this I created a smaller test SVN repository to make it easier to read network captures. (I made a svn repository

I have an R function (about 1000 lines long) that takes more than 20 times as long to run under R Windows 1.9.0 and 1.8.1 than it does under 1.7.1. Profile results indicate that the $<-.data.frame operation is the culprit, but I don't understand exactly what that is (assignment of data frame elements to another variable?), or why it's only a problem under 1.8.1 and 1.9.0. Any advice?

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Stuart Marsden <stuartmarsden at finmars.co.uk> wrote: > I have just started trying Opus with a view to using it in a project. I am > interested in embedded hardware and tried it on the Raspberry Pi using the > raspbian distro. > > The version of libopus in the repos is 0.9.14. I installed this and tried > encoding 2 minutes of speech from a

LLVM-2.6 takes 3s from OCamlbuild, but the lastest LLVM (I am using r95712) takes 34s. I attached the code. But the new LLVM fixed a problem of dispose_module in 2.6. I got this error in 2.6, but the new LLVM works well. While deleting: [14 x i8]* %greeting An asserting value handle still pointed to this value! UNREACHABLE executed at

On 04/29/2010 11:44 AM, Yuri wrote: > > I run the same simple Fibonacci computing code in JIT and as a native > executable. I see that with argument 45 JIT runs for 11.3sec and > executable runs for 7.5sec. > Why there is such difference? How long does it take for llc to compile it? Remember that the JIT includes code generation time. Best regards, --Edwin

Török Edwin wrote: > How long does it take for llc to compile it? > Remember that the JIT includes code generation time llc takes almost no time (0.00 user as measured by time), code is tiny. Yuri