Op 13-5-2013 14:57, Volker Lendecke schreef:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:52:56PM +0200, Danny wrote:
Hi all,

At the moment we are running Debian squeeze with stock samba 3.5.6.
and are testing some new samba installations from ubuntu 12.04,
centos 6.4 and debian wheezy. All running in a VM on a XenServer.
The samba servers are member of a 2008R2 domain, using smb1 protocol
all are running fine and we get a constant 90MB/s (big file
transfer) on our 1GB network.
We would like to enable smb2 protocol for performance reasons, but
when we do enable SMB2 (max protocol = SMB2) file transfer speed
drops to 50-60MB/s (one big file) instead of the 80-90MB/s we used
to get before. We noticed when this happens the cpu is at its max
instead of 60-70% when using smb1.
iostat doesn't show any serious load and our raid 10 setup isn't
experience any difficulties.
Using the packages (3.6.13) from EnterpriseSamba we get simular results.

Is it known enabling smb2 requires a faster cpu and our cpu is
simply not powerfull enough or is there another problem which we
should look into? (Or should we just stick to smb1, because smb2
isn't worth the trouble?)

You should definitely use SMB2. The higher CPU is
suprising. You should be able to max out a 1GB network with
SMB2 easily. Does Debian support the perf utility to find
out what the process does?

Volker

Thanks for replying.

'perf top' smb2 enabled shows:

Events: 33K cycles
 53.07%  [kernel]            [k] hypercall_page
 36.33%  smbd                [.] SHA256_Update
  1.99%  [kernel]            [k] copy_user_generic_string
  1.23%  libc-2.13.so        [.] 0x793e1
  1.10%  [xen_netfront]      [k] xennet_poll
</cut>

'perf top' smb2 disabled shows:
Events: 16K cycles
 72.59%  [kernel]            [k] hypercall_page
 12.04%  smbd                [.] 0x40a5ee
  1.86%  [kernel]            [k] copy_user_generic_string
  1.37%  [xen_netfront]      [k] xennet_poll
  0.56%  libc-2.13.so        [.] 0x89283
  0.35%  [kernel]            [k] xen_restore_fl_direct
  0.35%  [kernel]            [k] pvclock_clocksource_read


Looking at the above, disabling client and server signing gives me (in a quick test) back my performance. But now I'm prone to man in middle attacks? and if we run into other interoperabilities. (e.g. Windows clients/servers)?

Danny


--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba

Reply via email to