Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 13:57:36 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: brian@mediacity.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ummm.. nfs vs. samba Message-ID: <199604190427.NAA17654@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199604180934.CAA09237@MediaCity.com> from "Brian Litzinger" at Apr 18, 96 02:34:09 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brian Litzinger stands accused of saying: > > I remember reading on this forum a number of times that SAMBA was > much faster at serving files to MS Windows type machines than NFS. > > Did I remember that backwards? Nope. > I converted a client machine of mine from PCDOS 6.3/MS Windows3.1/NFS (or XFS) > to MSDOS 6.22/MS Windows95/SAMBA. > > And I can say that for the exact same equipment trying to transfer > the same 700MBs of data, the latter setup is astronomically > slower than the former. Can you be a bit more specific about "astronomically"? We see about 500K/sec here on Compex 21040-based cards, and about 350K/sec with NE2000's. We also have XFS in the shop, and I've never seen it go over 200K/sec on a cool day with the wind behind it. > So whats the deal? Dunno. What ethernet hardware? If you have a sever with serious balls your cards may be being overrun - SMB uses _big_ packets, so you'll get anything up to 64K of packets back-to-back which can be a bit much for a W95 client with a crummy adapter. > Brian Litzinger Powered by FreeBSD -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604190427.NAA17654>