From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NWvx4-0003yw-6C for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:03:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 80BFFE0BE5; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-px0-f174.google.com (mail-px0-f174.google.com [209.85.216.174]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47AE8E0BE5 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pxi4 with SMTP id 4so2112003pxi.32 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:03:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+ar2vAKnHynpXVwQ9W+nEvvyjSuPFY6Vo2rcOo95O3M=; b=EAER92euANSPglXZfAx9iNWeh7V8Dhnze8H3hKVoPEMv5a+LbwF3SHOf3WP9LmPAaL X8fMs2c4oDXPIZH96R9CdSf4vXgG86FPxwfNrFpajHTWQwyft/u/m75MPgFHuFM/yZFp qXiVWq0yziyN61nIy4OO5ZNYGtXUPP2EHYPVY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=A305O4yWHylxCPQALyWCHNoTaMuyVuVv9yFTrJ58sxLDPxZdfgqeS8sje6eHurcV9k vJvOW+sWhM33aGcdWx3l0lQznvEr8dI+ocYCiKJI3CPxyGfsGaSWXaLN39ft0MmcHi6o y//OKBoQKx5csV4W01fdA9eqxUx6VytdvUf34= Received: by 10.114.236.32 with SMTP id j32mr1905580wah.57.1263837804779; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:03:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.0.91? (mu.NMSU.Edu [128.123.85.141]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm4424935pzk.6.2010.01.18.10.03.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:03:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B54A262.1030300@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:03:14 -0700 From: Hung Dang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091228 Thunderbird/3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] How to determine if a NIC is playing gigabit? References: <4B091D33-9E06-47DD-88AC-D122FD2E1590@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> <4ef07b8c1001180446v5d6abd16qb1e637d527263049@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4ef07b8c1001180446v5d6abd16qb1e637d527263049@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 7c5395e5-ca2d-47bf-af7a-addac6b8d20a X-Archives-Hash: 1078f4b378b14e22410a5b25623d0bed One more thing. The file transfer speed is min(max(HDD),max(NIC),max(others)) so it will depend on your HDD, your network and other reasons. I find out that using sftp command seem to be faster than NFS or Samba. Could you try sftp and check if it is faster or not? Then check the dmesg as well as network cables to see if there is any problem. Hung On 01/18/10 05:46, Dan Cowsill wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Stroller > wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> Yesterday I reseated the network cable between my server cupboard and my >> desk, and it now lights up on the switch by my desk as gigabit. But a >> file-transfer today is slower than I might have hoped. >> >> I'm not ruling out the cable, because it's pretty beat up (but the switch >> *is* lighting up as 1000), but how do I determine, please, that the Linux >> server at the other end is recognising the NIC and negotiating as gigabit >> speeds? >> >> The hard-drives on the server are using an older PCI SATA card, and the NIC >> is also PCI. But I would have expected it to be a bit faster than 100Mbps. >> >> Any estimates over what kind of speed I should be seeing for large >> file-transfers over Samba? Wildly ball-park is fine - I wouldn't expect a >> 10x speed increase, but maybe 2x or 3x - 4x would be great! >> >> I'll be testing between my Macs (both on the desktop switch, ruling out both >> the Linux box and the suspicious cable) later today, I'd just like some >> ideas of where I should be starting from. >> >> Right now I'm seeing 10 gigs of .mp4 files (1gb - 2gb per video file) taking >> about an hour - that's about what I'd expect from old 100Mbps networking, >> not this shiny new stuff. >> >> I'm not seeing any difference commenting & uncommenting "aio read size = 1, >> aio write size = 1" (separate lines) from /etc/samba/smb.conf and then >> running `/etc/init.d/samba reload`, but maybe I shouldn't expect that to >> make any difference on an existing transfer. I just don't want to interfere >> with this right now - I just want to copy as much as possible on to my >> laptop before I go out, and I'll take a look at this performance issue when >> I get home. >> >> Thanks in advance for any suggestions or pointers, >> >> Stroller. >> >> >> >> > In all likelihood, its your hard disk slowing down the network > transfer, and not the cabling. Generally speaking, if the hardware > says gigabit, than you've got gigabit. > >