Max Stein wrote:
> Unfortunately, the performance of the cygwin sshd server is very poor
> when it comes to copying large files. I have made this observation on
> several new and fast machines (3 GHz, 512 MB RAM, 100 MB/s Intel Pro
> network card) running with Windows XP or Windows 2003 Server. The
> Ah, so your first MB was Megabit and the others were MegaByte...
To get it straight, and for the archives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MB - overwiew.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit lower case "b", also @ "More than one bit"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiB - UPPER case "B" here.
Another
At 22:52 2006-03-18 +0100, Max Stein wrote:
>> 1. Is it possible to increase the bandwith by having the client aggregate
>> multiple sessions through a single pipe?
>
>Could you please give me some advice how this can be achieved? I am not an
>SSH guru yet.
Unfortunately neither am I. It was an i
On Mar 17, 2006, at 7:49 PM, Max Stein wrote:
Unfortunately, the performance of the cygwin sshd server is very
poor when it comes to copying large files. I have made this
observation on several new and fast machines (3 GHz, 512 MB RAM,
100 MB/s Intel Pro network card) running with Windows
1. Is it possible to increase the bandwith by having the client aggregate
multiple sessions through a single pipe?
Could you please give me some advice how this can be achieved? I am not an
SSH guru yet.
2. It would seem that PPTP connections can be much faster. E.g. a FreeBSD
MPD running on
At 02:49 2006-03-18 +0100, Max Stein wrote:
>Unfortunately, the performance of the cygwin sshd server is very poor when
>it comes to copying large files. I have made this observation on several new
>and fast machines (3 GHz, 512 MB RAM, 100 MB/s Intel Pro network card)
>running with Windows XP o
6 matches
Mail list logo
