Hello again... I recently sent an email to the list regarding slow
performance on a Samba server. I got a few responses (thanks!), and tried
all of the suggestions, but I'm still seeing about *half* the speed of NT
Server. And this is on a machine which is at least twice as fast as the NT
Server, in terms of hardware.
I had never imagined that Samba would be leaps and bounds faster than NT,
but I did expect a comparable level of performance, especially from a
considerably faster machine. After trying all of the various socket option
buffer sizes, read prediction, read and xmit sizes, read prediction and
strict sync to no avail, should I come to the conclusion that Samba is
simply (quite a bit) slower than NT? Perhaps version 2.0 represents a large
performance increase?
Note that I still think Samba is an excellent package, and would really like
to continue using it... It's just that the people using our network
services expect a certain degree of performance, and I cannot sacrifice that
entirely.
If anyone has any further ideas or suggestions, I'd love to hear them! Note
that FTP performance rings in at around 6-7 MB/s for large files, so the
network and machine itself seem to working quite well. Samba writes from
Windows 98 clients, while improved, now occur at about 700 KB/s and reads
are happening at about 1.5 MB/s. (On the much slower NT Server, reads are
occurring at around 4 MB/s and writes at 2-3 MB/s...)
Thanks again,
Damon
* Damon T. Miller * Network Administrator
* Harmonix Music Systems, Inc * http://www.harmonixmusic.com
* Cambridge, Massachusetts * 617.491.6144 x117
