From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 5 18:42:20 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782FA41D for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 18:42:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from terje@elde.net) Received: from keepquiet.net (keepquiet.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:130:84c1::deaf:babe]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EBC41C31 for ; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 18:42:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.156.126.40] (2.150.57.129.tmi.telenormobil.no [2.150.57.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: terje@elde.net) by keepquiet.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09F5A2E43E; Fri, 5 Jul 2013 20:42:15 +0200 (CEST) References: <51D6F1E4.4090001@netfence.it> In-Reply-To: <51D6F1E4.4090001@netfence.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: <669058E9-E663-424E-94A6-29D81757C580@elde.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A523) From: Terje Elde Subject: Re: Possibly OT: NFS vs SMB performance Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 20:42:06 +0200 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:42:20 -0000 On 5. juli 2013, at 18:18, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > Is this normal in your experience? Did you do them in that order, or did you do the smb (slow) one first? If the slow was first, I'm thinking caching on the server could be a major f= actor.=20 Terje