Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:49:54 -0700 From: Frank Jahnke <jahnke@sonatabio.com> To: Lucas Holt <luke@foolishgames.com> Cc: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Terrible hme throughput Message-ID: <1159390194.850.252.camel@pinot.fmjassoc.com> In-Reply-To: <655D1BFE-663E-43FA-823A-580D1C750C1C@foolishgames.com> References: <1159385171.850.237.camel@pinot.fmjassoc.com> <7C3C28AA-2F03-4767-B480-8E1C499F0F94@foolishgames.com> <1159387883.850.243.camel@pinot.fmjassoc.com> <655D1BFE-663E-43FA-823A-580D1C750C1C@foolishgames.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 16:40 -0400, Lucas Holt wrote: > >> A few suggestions come to mind. Try another protocol and see what > >> type of transfer speeds you get. > > > > It there one you might suggest? > > You could always try ftp. In my experience its much faster than sftp > although not secure. Just to test it might be interesting. That would be the usual candidate; I'll have to enable it and then try it. This is all using computers behind a firewall that are inaccessible from the Internet. So security is of no concern for these tests. > > It is a SCSI drive using 20MB/s transfers at the controller. It has > > been tested and it works properly (about 15MB/s speeds). Though not > > fast, that should be plenty for a 100Mb/s network (typo in original > > post). > I'll get my sparc out later and do a little testing. I'd appreciate that. Mine is not a Sun (it was made by Tritec) but any low-end SPARC of the era ought to do. Even if it is an Ultra 5 with the slow IDE controller. I just can't see the controller making the big difference for this application. I would also appreciate it if you would copy the list so we can keep the thread in tact.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1159390194.850.252.camel>