similar to: Samba performance problem over a radio link.

Joel Handler wrote: > Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:50:33 -0400 > Subject: Netscape error > We are having a problem with Netscape that every so often we get lanman > redirector errors. We have Netscape 4.73 setup so that the users home > folder is located on the samba server (H drive). Do you know have any > ideas. The errors pop up randomly and have yet to be > pinpointed

When the world was young, Adam Snodgrass carved some runes like this: > Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 19:06:07 -0400 > Subject: Failure to execute programs from a mapped drive letter on a samba > I have a strange situation. I have a Linux machine running samba > 1.9.18p8, serving a mix of NT Workstation 4.0 and Windows 95 clients. In > general, things have worked flawlessly, with one

I have a Dell server with four bonded, gigabit interfaces. Bonding mode is 802.3ad, xmit_hash_policy=layer3+4. When testing this setup with iperf, I never get more than a total of about 3Gbps throughput. Is there anything to tweak to get better throughput? Or am I running into other limits (e.g. was reading about tcp retransmit limits for mode 0). The iperf test was run with iperf -s on the

Howdy: I'm new to this samba stuff, but I've run across a problem that doesn't seem to be documented anywhere. It seems that OSR/2 clients (with all the M$ system updates; I already added the EnableClearTextPassword key) that have had their TCP/IP settings tweaked in the registry (eg, MaxMTU=576, TTL=32, RWIN added, etc) for DUN connections have mucho problems with a samba

When the world was young, Ole Holm Nielsen carved some runes like this: > Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 12:03:59 +0100 > From: Ole Holm Nielsen <Ole.H.Nielsen@fysik.dtu.dk> > Subject: Re: Dial in accounts > Regarding remote network browsing: > We have had mixed success browsing Network Neighborhood from > PPP-connected Win95 PCs. Our servers are all SAMBA, no NT here :-)

I'm only doing one frame using speex_encode_int greatly simplifies my code I'm not sure why the sample I was working off of was converting the shorts to floats then calling the other encode/decode methods. Based off of your suggestions I tried the following but I get the same result. virtual Enigma::u8* Encode(Enigma::u8* inputBuffer,size_t inputSize, size_t& outputSize) {

Hi, I am using the speex 1.0.4 library from Windows. I have posted my problem before but didn't get a solution. I am doing an VOIP project in which i am recording sound and streaming it to the peer. I wanted to encode and decode wav files that brought me to this site. I am recording sound in the following format:- m_WaveFormatEx.wFormatTag = WAVE_FORMAT_PCM;

I'm getting garbled playback with decoded fragments and I'm hoping someone here can point me in the right direction to correcting the problem. Essentially I'm capturing audio from the microphone. I stream it over the net, but for testing purposes with this API I'm just grabbing the whole chunk and encoding / decoding it right away and then updating the sound buffer for

Alright noted, I changed me code so that the state is created in the constructor and destroyed in the destructor of the object. However I'm still getting the same issue although I'm sure that would have bit me sooner or later. The new code is as follows. virtual Enigma::u8* Encode(Enigma::u8* inputBuffer,size_t inputSize, size_t& outputSize) { short *in=(short*)inputBuffer;

Hi, I have just started to work with Xen and have a question regarding the expected network throughput. Here is my configuration: Processor: 2.8 GHz Intel Celeron (Socket 775) Motherboard: Gigabyte 8I865GVMF-775 Memory: 1.5 GB Basic system: Kubuntu 6.06 Dapper Drake Xen version: 3.02 (Latest 3.0 stable download) I get the following iperf results: Src Dest Throughput Dom0 Dom0

I set up a domU as a backup server, but it has very, very poor network performance with external computers. I ran some tests with iperf and found some very weird results. Using iperf, I get these approximate numbers (the left column is the iperf client and the right column is the iperf server): domU --> domU 1.77 Gbits/sec (using 127.0.0.1) domU --> domU 1.85 Gbits/sec (using domU

I set up a domU as a backup server, but it has very, very poor network performance with external computers. I ran some tests with iperf and found some very weird results. Using iperf, I get these approximate numbers (the left column is the iperf client and the right column is the iperf server): domU --> domU 1.77 Gbits/sec (using 127.0.0.1) domU --> domU 1.85 Gbits/sec (using domU

+0100 From: Daniel Schall <tinc-devel at mon-clan.de> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 17:00:35 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Improved PMTU discovery diff --git a/lib/dropin.c b/lib/dropin.c index 52fb5b8..2b803b1 100644 --- a/lib/dropin.c +++ b/lib/dropin.c @@ -165,8 +165,8 @@ #endif =20 #ifdef HAVE_MINGW -int usleep(long usec) { - Sleep(usec / 1000); - return 0; -} +//int usleep(long usec) { +//

Hi, I am seeing a performance degradation while using libvirt to start my vm (kvm). vm is fedora 12 and host is also fedora 12, both with 2.6.32.10-90.fc12.i686. Here are the statistics from iperf : >From VM: [ 3] 0.0-30.0 sec 199 MBytes 55.7 Mbits/sec >From host : [ 3] 0.0-30.0 sec 331 MBytes 92.6 Mbits/sec libvirt command as seen from ps output : /usr/bin/qemu-kvm -S -M

Hi I am search a sample config for my linux box: Shorewall 3.2.3 Eth0 => Internet Access 4Mbits on ethernet Eth1 => Lan Eth2 => Lan 2 Eth3 => Lan 3 i want limit the internet access: Eth1 = 2 Mbits Eth2 = 0,5 Mbits Eth3 = 1,5 Mbits but if eth1 don''t use 2 Mbits other lan can use it anyone have a simple sample config for help me ? Thanks bye

> > > > Hi Michael, > > > > Sorry for the delay, had some problems with my mailbox, and I realized > > just now that > > my reply wasn't sent. > > The vm indeed ALWAYS utilized 100% cpu, whether polling was enabled or > > not. > > The vhost thread utilized less than 100% (of the other cpu) when polling > > was disabled. >

> > > > Hi Michael, > > > > Sorry for the delay, had some problems with my mailbox, and I realized > > just now that > > my reply wasn't sent. > > The vm indeed ALWAYS utilized 100% cpu, whether polling was enabled or > > not. > > The vhost thread utilized less than 100% (of the other cpu) when polling > > was disabled. >

Hi List. First post, be gentle please. Is there any limit in the linux UDP rate? I am using linux kernel 2.6 and iperf to measure bandwidth between two endpoints connected by 100 Mbits ethernet. Running (as root) iperf -u -s and iperf -u -c always gives me 1.05 Mbits/seg even when runned in the same machine. Can somebody clarify this? Thanks in advance. Sebastian

Hello all! I have a small LAN at home and when someone starts to download (only one), interractive traffic (www, chat and online games) is impossible with standard kernel queues setup... So I started to shape. My ISP gives me a 512 kbits link to the Internet and a 100 Mbits link to some of the other big ISPs in my country. If I set the rate of the parent htb qdisc at 512 kbits, I will never use

Hello list, I have two differents installation Xen Hypervisor on two identical physical server, on the same switch : The problem is on my new server (Xen 4.0.1 with pvops kernel 2.6.32.24), I have bad performance on bandwidth I have test with a files copy and "iperf". Result iperf average: Transfert Bandwidth XEN-A -> Windows