On Apr 21, 2011, at 5:44 PM, Eric D. Mudama wrote: > On Thu, Apr 21 at 13:53, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: >> Gary wrote: >>> I can't speak to this issue in regards to OpenIndiana but CIFS/samba >>> has historically been much slower than NFS, FTP, and even netatalk, >>> etc. due to its large metadata overhead. One can observe this in the >>> wild with a few well time tcpdumps. One thing that might be worth >>> investigating in this situation, however, is a comparison of smbclient >>> transfers to/from another Unix host vs. transfers to/from a Win7 host. >> >> Yeah, I actually tested that. smb on a centos5.5 box. Almost identical >> results, which is why I am suspecting what you are. I think for now, I'm >> just going to stick to using iSCSI.... > > Wierd. My oi_148 installation (in-kernel CIFS server) reads large > files at ~100MB/s to win7-64 clients over a gigabit network without > trouble.
One might hope the in-kernel server would have some performance advantages, or why bother? Further, someone else says "metadata overhead", and you say "large files". I'm thinking there's _less_ metadata overhead per unit data with large files than if one was say copying, archiving, or extracting a bunch of small files. _______________________________________________ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
