Re: Poor Samba throughput on 6.0 RC1

From: Alexander Leidinger (Alexander_at_Leidinger.net)
Date: 10/26/05

  • Next message: Wilko Bulte: "Re: FreeBSD on IBM blade servers" 
    Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:37:59 +0200
To: Joao Barros <joao.barros@gmail.com>

    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.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Wilko Bulte: "Re: FreeBSD on IBM blade servers"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Partition Magic Incompatibility??
      ... manual repair etc. are still abysmal for NTFS. ... FATxx, rather than anything inherent in the file systems. ... MS'a approach to file system maintenance seems to assume that the ... - a directory entry that points to the cluster chain ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
    • Re: FAT32 v.s NTFS
      ... Size Limitations in NTFS and FAT File Systems ... Table 13.4 Default Cluster Sizes for Volumes with Windows XP Professional ... Volume Size FAT16 Cluster Size FAT32 Cluster Size NTFS Cluster Size ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.file_system)
    • Re: FAT32 v.s NTFS
      ... With more and more systems being sold without floppies, making boot floppies ... above will not allow you to create a single 80 gig partition on an 80 gig ... A cluster is the MINIMUM ... NTFS provides cluster sizes closer to what the HDD is actually using ... ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.file_system)
    • NTFS 3.0 corrupting ability to use NTWKST 4.0 chkdsk ...
      ... that it would make to NTFS. ... >MS should be required by law to supply a corrective fix ... >version of NTFS which effectivly disables CHKDSK for NT ... >Service packs are NOT to change NTFS partition versions - ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.file_system)
    • Re: [OT] Re: fqdn test - ignore
      ... " In NTFS a 40 byte or so URL ... your own argument, if it does not work for you), that MFT ... > As you would put it, you are assuming things not in evidence. ... >> That agrees with my definition of the cluster as the smallest ...
      (sci.electronics.basics)