From owner-freebsd-current Mon Dec 9 02:04:04 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id CAA25635 for current-outgoing; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 02:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from btp1da.phy.uni-bayreuth.de (btp1da.phy.uni-bayreuth.de [132.180.20.32]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id CAA25618 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 02:03:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by btp1da.phy.uni-bayreuth.de (8.8.4/8.7.3) id LAA16976; Mon, 9 Dec 1996 11:03:10 +0100 (CET) From: Werner Griessl Message-Id: <199612091003.LAA16976@btp1da.phy.uni-bayreuth.de> Subject: Re: rdump slow solved In-Reply-To: <199612090908.KAA22223@uriah.heep.sax.de> from J Wunsch at "Dec 9, 96 10:08:44 am" To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 11:03:10 +0100 (CET) Cc: current@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > As Werner Griessl wrote: > > > > > DUMP: finished in 430 seconds, throughput 49 KBytes/sec > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ !!!!! > > > > > > I can't confirm this. What's your blocksize? What system is the > > > remote TCP peer? Is the tape streaming? > > > > > > > Blocksize is the default (10), remote system is a DEC-alpha 3000/600, > > tape is a HP-DAT 35480 with local transfer-rate ~250 kb/sec . > > Do you get the same slow througput when using rsh/dd for the tape? > What does GNUtar's ``-f remote:/dev/ice'' yield? Does increasing the > blocksize e.g. to 32 improve anything? > > Which throughput would you get to /dev/null on the remote machine? > Questions, questions, questions. > Thanks for the hints, Joerg ! Changing the blocksize to 32 was the solution . Have now with "rdump 0uBbf 1000000 32 ....": DUMP: finished in 79 seconds, throughput 283 KBytes/sec ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Werner > -- > cheers, J"org > > joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE > Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) >