Linux - NetworkingThis forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
i *should* be getting ~100M/s transfer rates (minus overhead) between computers on a LAN with 10/100 nics and router, correct? because since installing NFS, i only seem to be getting <10 (4 M/s going to windows), and i'm wondering what's limiting me. how can i diagnose this? thx.
my sense is it's some misconfiguration rather than something taking the bandwidth, though i could be wrong.
i just installed ethereal, so i'll check that out. i've never used it before, so any tips appreciated. thx.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>edit: okay, i think i mostly got it. running ethereal showed UDP protocol hitting 100%, and i found an LQ thread recommending putting tcp in the NFS mounting options in fstab. now i'm getting 11.5 MB/sec transfers between my two NFS computers, and about 6MB/s over ftp to my other linux machine. it starts out around 9MB/s for about 5-10 seconds and then starts degrading, so i think there's some disk overhead there or something (5400rpm drives). windows is still a little slow, but i think i have a cat5 cable to that machine. (or maybe windows just sucks. )
Last edited by synaptical; 10-17-2004 at 08:30 PM.
Distribution: slack current with 2.6.16.18 (still off the hook)
Posts: 284
Rep:
You said:
Quote:
because since installing NFS, i only seem to be getting <10 (4 M/s going to windows), and i'm wondering what's limiting me. how can i diagnose this? thx.
Ok how exactly does NFS and windows has to do on the same network?, to comunicate with a windows machine use samba.
My personal experience shows that you will never get the 100Mbps, the most I've seen is about 64Mbps and that is from a straight NFS to NFS connection.
Besides have in mind that windows mesures the speed in MB/s and linux does it in Mb/s, so 4MB/s is actuali 32Mb/s on linux standard wich is 32% of the theoretical speed. One more thing are the NICs set up to FULL DUPLEX?
Originally posted by mago Ok how exactly does NFS and windows has to do on the same network?, to comunicate with a windows machine use samba.
i don't know much about nfs, i thought some aspect of the protocol (e.g., UDP) might be using up bandwidth, and if windows used that more than linux to do a transfer, that might account for it. (?) (i.e., even though windows is not using the NFS, is what i mean.)
Quote:
My personal experience shows that you will never get the 100Mbps, the most I've seen is about 64Mbps and that is from a straight NFS to NFS connection.
Besides have in mind that windows mesures the speed in MB/s and linux does it in Mb/s, so 4MB/s is actuali 32Mb/s on linux standard wich is 32% of the theoretical speed.
i was measuring from linux, though, with "traffic," an simpler iptraf-like program.
Quote:
One more thing are the NICs set up to FULL DUPLEX?
i can't seem to check the one on my main computer, i guess b/c of the forcedeth driver. i'm assuming with 11MB it is. the other computer on NFS is definitely full duplex, and so is the one with the 9800KB/s (before it degrades).
Code:
[1] root:~ # ethtool eth0
Settings for eth0:
Supports Wake-on: g
Wake-on: d
Link detected: yes
[3] root:~ # ethtool -s eth0 speed 100 duplex full
Cannot get current device settings: Operation not supported
not setting speed
not setting duplex
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
root@ripper:~ # /usr/local/sbin/ethtool eth0
Settings for eth0:
Supported ports: [ TP MII FIBRE ]
Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full
100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full
Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
Speed: 100Mb/s
Duplex: Full
Port: Twisted Pair
PHYAD: 1
Transceiver: internal
Auto-negotiation: on
Supports Wake-on: pumbags
Wake-on: ubg
SecureOn password: 00:00:00:00:00:00
Current message level: 0x000040c5 (16581)
Link detected: yes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
root@moe:~ # mii-tool eth0
eth0: negotiated 100baseTx-FD, link ok
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
)
