On Monday, January 28, 2013 12:32:50 PM UTC-5, Rob Day wrote: > On 28 January 2013 17:07, Wanderer wrote: > > > Yes. I noticed this variability. I've been using the Totusoft > > Lan_Speedtest.exe to test some modules. I've tested through the wifi to our > > intranet and saw variations I believe do to network traffic. I also tried > > peer to peer and the write time actual got worse. I don't know if it has do > > to with the firewall or the hard drive speed or just Windows giving this > > process low priority. I also saw drop outs. So figuring out the metric for > > pass/fail will be interesting. I'll check into setting an ftp for this test. > > > > Why involve a protocol at all? I'd just create a socket > > (http://docs.python.org/3.3/library/socket.html) and measure how long, > > on average, it took to write a given number of arbitrary bytes (e.g. > > "This is a string" repeated a million times) to it and then read a > > given number of bytes back. That would be a relatively consistent > > metric, whereas if you try using FTP you'll run into issues, as > > already noted, where disk read/write speed and details of your FTP > > server implementation like compression or multiple network connections > > affect the result significantly. > > > > -- > > Robert K. Day > >
Thanks, I'll check out sockets. That's probably what I needed to search for instead WLAN and Wi-Fi. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
