Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:37:59 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Joao Barros <joao.barros@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Robert Atkinson <phreaki@gmail.com>, Samuel Clements <sclements@linkline.com> Subject: Re: Poor Samba throughput on 6.0 RC1 Message-ID: <20051026163759.hlvgwsmbokswk8ww@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <70e8236f0510251636k1002cc96yd357492a138e1933@mail.gmail.com> References: <70e8236f0510241518x7b280938jd15f7e8c3224cbd@mail.gmail.com> <435D64B2.2020703@linkline.com> <6fb2b4650510242021l72a1ceb9m91e72a0420458982@mail.gmail.com> <70e8236f0510251636k1002cc96yd357492a138e1933@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joao Barros <joao.barros@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10/25/05, Robert Atkinson <phreaki@gmail.com> wrote: >> Maybe a longshot, but what is your cluster size? > The default block size of 16384 bytes, a fragment size of 2048 bytes > The ide drive has a NTFS partition which I mounted readonly and > copying files from there resulted with the same below expected > performance :( I haven't read the entire thread, but by looking at this I assume there's another FS than NTFS involved. Benchmarking with NTFS (or MSDOSFS) as the underlying FS doesn't make sense (unless you want to measure the performance of NTFS or MSDOSFS), since it's slow (for NTFS you should be happy to at least be able to read something, there's no open documentation about it available). So I suggest you try with a good FS (ufs 1 or 2) only and don't bother about NTFS, to make sure the FS isn't the bottleneck. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 The Supreme Court does it with all deliberate speed.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051026163759.hlvgwsmbokswk8ww>