Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33

Thread: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs & Samba

  1. #1

    Default Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs & Samba

    I am working to set up a local network between my two laptops for file sharing. Figured that a wired Gigabit ethernet connection should be fastest (1000 Gbit/s, i.e. s.th. like 110 MiB/s in practice), and this connection should be the bottleneck. Hard disks are SSDs (>500 MiB/s). Both laptops have Intel Gigabit cards; connection is done with a short CAT. 5E ethernet cable, no crossed cable needed since the cards are good enough.

    Up front: When running both laptops on Windows (8.1 in my case) with the ethernet card drivers left in their default installation states, everything works well. I am getting 110 MiB/s when copying large iso files in any direction (from A to B and B to A, fetching and sending). In this case, all hard disk partitions involved are NTFS.

    Going to the real case now: Running Linux on one machine, either Tumbleweed or Manjaro (dual bootable). Sticking to Windows 8.1 on the other machine. Same ethernet cable, hard disk partitions on the Linux side either ext4 or ntfs. Bottom line: The resulting file transfer speeds are not exactly acceptable, I am getting approx. 50 MiB/s only. Seldomly it's 55, mostly just below 50, quite often only 40. This is the case with both Tumbleweed and Manjaro, and I am out of clues now after consulting many websites and even two textbooks.

    What I did is as follows (short summary, this holds for both TW and Manjaro):
    1. On the Linux side, I configured a Link-Local ethernet connection using Network Manager. I can use whatever setting for the card speed is GUI available here (use auto-negotiation set to auto or manual, full duplex or half duplex) - same result.
    2. On the Linux side, avahi-daemon is running to do zeroconf. On the Windows side, zeroconf is handled by Bonjour with the two well-known Apple drivers extracted from iTunes and installed.
    3. At this stage, each laptop can ping the other one using either their 169.254.x.x zeroconf private IPV4 addresses, their IPV6 addresses, or their computer names.
    4. In order to share files residing on the Windows machine to the Linux machine, I set up the usual file sharings and access permissions in Windows Explorer. On the Linux machine, a Samba Client is being run. For both Tumbleweed and Manjaro, this works quite easily using just the file managers (Dolphin/Krusader in TW KDE Plasma, Thunar in Manjaro Xfce).
    5. In order to share files residing on the Linux machine to the Windows machine, I set up a Samba Server. This was the most complicated part for me, but I got it set up. Within this task, I went through an unproductive period until I realized that setting things up as root in /etc/samba/smb.conf and fiddling simultaneously with file sharing in the file managers as user is absolutely not advisable. So I have the Samba Server set up cleanly as root in /etc/samba/smb.conf only. Windows can connect to the Linux Samba shares using Windows Explorer.
    6. Firewalls are set up appropriately, too. In Tumbleweed, firewalld is preset nicely and comprehensively, and one just needs to assign a firewalld zone to the Link Local connection in Network Manager. In Manjaro, ufw with the gufw interface is used, and it takes opening the pre-configured samba ports.
    7. At this point in time, I think things are basically set up. I figure I will have to read more on how to make this local workgroup network as safe as possible beyond the defaults.

    So now, I would need some help to find out why my file transfers within this littel LAN workgroup are so **** slow.

    What can I provide to help you diagnose and hopefully solve this issue? All terminal commands were run while Link Local was connected.
    Code:
    $ sudo ethtool enp0s25
    [sudo] Passwort für root: 
    Settings for enp0s25:
            Supported ports: [ TP ]
            Supported link modes:   10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 
                                    100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 
                                    1000baseT/Full 
            Supported pause frame use: No
            Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
            Supported FEC modes: Not reported
            Advertised link modes:  1000baseT/Full 
            Advertised pause frame use: No
            Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
            Advertised FEC modes: Not reported
            Speed: 1000Mb/s
            Duplex: Full
            Port: Twisted Pair
            PHYAD: 1
            Transceiver: internal
            Auto-negotiation: on
            MDI-X: off (auto)
            Supports Wake-on: pumbg
            Wake-on: d
            Current message level: 0x00000007 (7)
                                   drv probe link
            Link detected: yes
    Code:
    $ inxi -Fdxxxz
    System:    Host: susytmblwdke8570 Kernel: 5.2.10-1-default x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 9.2.1 
               Desktop: KDE Plasma 5.16.4 tk: Qt 5.13.0 wm: kwin_x11 dm: SDDM Distro: openSUSE Tumbleweed 20190829 
    Machine:   Type: Laptop System: Hewlett-Packard product: HP EliteBook 8570w v: A1028C1100 serial: <filter> Chassis: 
               type: 10 serial: <filter> 
               Mobo: Hewlett-Packard model: 176B v: KBC Version 50.1F serial: <filter> UEFI: Hewlett-Packard 
               v: 68IAV Ver. F.71 date: 04/19/2019 
    Battery:   ID-1: BAT0 charge: 66.9 Wh condition: 66.9/66.9 Wh (100%) volts: 17.0/14.8 model: Hewlett-Packard Primary 
               type: Li-ion serial: <filter> status: Full 
               Device-1: hidpp_battery_0 model: Logitech M705 serial: <filter> charge: 60% rechargeable: yes 
               status: Discharging 
    CPU:       Topology: Quad Core model: Intel Core i7-3720QM bits: 64 type: MT MCP arch: Ivy Bridge rev: 9 
               L2 cache: 6144 KiB 
               flags: lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx bogomips: 41502 
               Speed: 1198 MHz min/max: 1200/3600 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 1198 2: 1197 3: 1197 4: 1197 5: 1198 6: 1204 
               7: 1198 8: 1197 
    Graphics:  Device-1: NVIDIA GK107GLM [Quadro K1000M] vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: nouveau v: kernel 
               bus ID: 01:00.0 chip ID: 10de:0ffc 
               Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.5 driver: nouveau unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa alternate: nv,nvidia 
               compositor: kwin_x11 resolution: 1600x900~60Hz 
               OpenGL: renderer: NVE7 v: 4.3 Mesa 19.1.5 direct render: Yes 
    Audio:     Device-1: Intel 7 Series/C216 Family High Definition Audio vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: snd_hda_intel 
               v: kernel bus ID: 00:1b.0 chip ID: 8086:1e20 
               Device-2: NVIDIA GK107 HDMI Audio vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 01:00.1 
               chip ID: 10de:0e1b 
               Sound Server: ALSA v: k5.2.10-1-default 
    Network:   Device-1: Intel 82579LM Gigabit Network vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: e1000e v: 3.2.6-k port: 5040 
               bus ID: 00:19.0 chip ID: 8086:1502 
               IF: enp0s25 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
               Device-2: Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 [Taylor Peak] driver: iwlwifi v: kernel port: 4000 
               bus ID: 25:00.0 chip ID: 8086:0082 
               IF: wlo1 state: up mac: <filter> 
    Drives:    Local Storage: total: 5.46 TiB used: 1.50 TiB (27.5%) 
               ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Samsung model: SSD 860 EVO 2TB size: 1.82 TiB speed: 6.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> 
               rev: 2B6Q scheme: GPT 
               ID-2: /dev/sdb vendor: Samsung model: SSD 860 EVO 4TB size: 3.64 TiB speed: 6.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> 
               rev: 2B6Q scheme: GPT 
               Message: No Optical or Floppy data was found. 
    Partition: ID-1: / size: 100.00 GiB used: 20.87 GiB (20.9%) fs: btrfs dev: /dev/sda4 
               ID-2: /home size: 48.97 GiB used: 2.02 GiB (4.1%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda5 
               ID-3: /opt size: 100.00 GiB used: 20.87 GiB (20.9%) fs: btrfs dev: /dev/sda4 
               ID-4: /tmp size: 100.00 GiB used: 20.87 GiB (20.9%) fs: btrfs dev: /dev/sda4 
               ID-5: /var size: 100.00 GiB used: 20.87 GiB (20.9%) fs: btrfs dev: /dev/sda4 
               ID-6: swap-1 size: 18.00 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda14 
    Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 50.0 C mobo: N/A gpu: nouveau temp: 127 C 
               Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A 
    Info:      Processes: 256 Uptime: 1h 15m Memory: 15.59 GiB used: 1.51 GiB (9.7%) Init: systemd v: 242 runlevel: 5 
               target: graphical.target Compilers: gcc: N/A Shell: bash v: 5.0.7 running in: konsole inxi: 3.0.32
    Code:
    $ sudo hwinfo --netcard
    12: PCI 2500.0: 0282 WLAN controller                            
      ... <omitted> ...
      Attached to: #17 (PCI bridge)
    
    18: PCI 19.0: 0200 Ethernet controller
      [Created at pci.386]
      Unique ID: IDxx.xxxxxxx <edited out>
      SysFS ID: /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:19.0
      SysFS BusID: 0000:00:19.0
      Hardware Class: network
      Model: "Intel 82579LM Gigabit Network Connection (Lewisville)"
      Vendor: pci 0x8086 "Intel Corporation"
      Device: pci 0x1502 "82579LM Gigabit Network Connection (Lewisville)"
      SubVendor: pci 0x103c "Hewlett-Packard Company"
      SubDevice: pci 0x176b 
      Revision: 0x04
      Driver: "e1000e"
      Driver Modules: "e1000e"
      Device File: enp0s25
      Memory Range: 0xd9400000-0xd941ffff (rw,non-prefetchable)
      Memory Range: 0xd943b000-0xd943bfff (rw,non-prefetchable)
      I/O Ports: 0x5040-0x505f (rw)
      IRQ: 34 (136310 events)
      HW Address: xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx <edited out>
      Permanent HW Address: xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx <edited out>
      Link detected: yes
      Module Alias: "pci:v00008086d00001502sv0000103Csd0000176Bbc02sc00i00"
      Driver Info #0:
        Driver Status: e1000e is active
        Driver Activation Cmd: "modprobe e1000e"
      Config Status: cfg=no, avail=yes, need=no, active=unknown
    Code:
    $ testparm
    Load smb config files from /etc/samba/smb.conf
    Loaded services file OK.
    Server role: ROLE_STANDALONE
    
    Press enter to see a dump of your service definitions
    
    # Global parameters
    [global]
            logon drive = P:
            logon home = \\%L\%U\.9xprofile
            logon path = \\%L\profiles\.msprofile
            map to guest = Bad User
            name resolve order = bcast host lmhosts wins
            netbios name = TMBLWD-8570
            preferred master = Yes
            server string = ""
            usershare allow guests = Yes
            usershare max shares = 100
            workgroup = LRLINWINGRP
            idmap config * : backend = tdb
            include = /etc/samba/dhcp.conf
    
    [TW-AVs-I-shared]
            comment = I in AVs shared
            force user = myself
            path = /home/myself/AVs/I
            read only = No
            valid users = myself
    
    [TW-VMs-V-shared]
            comment = VMs in VMs shared
            force user = myself
            path = /home/myself/VMs/VMs
            read only = No
            valid users = myself
    
    [TW-XCs-X-shared]
            comment = X in XCs shared
            force user = myself
            path = /home/myself/XCs/X
            read only = No
            valid users = myself
    Remarks: For setting up the Samba Servers on both Linuxes, the sticky post by swerdna here https://forums.opensuse.org/showthre...-the-local-LAN was most helpful - thanks for providing this.
    I did also consult this very recent thread here https://forums.opensuse.org/showthre...ows(dual-boot), but despite the promising title I couldn't get much help for my problem from it.

    I have a couple of questions or doubts regarding my procedure right away: Is it correct to have zeroconf (as avahi/Bonjour) running at the same time as Samba (netBIOS)? Is the "name resolve order = bcast host lmhosts wins" in /etc/samba/smb.conf the best possible way; it was taken from swerdna's post cited above.

    Any help is gratefully apreciated in advance.
    Last edited by malcolmlewis; 04-Sep-2019 at 06:29. Reason: Add samba reference

  2. #2

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Doing a more systematic investigation into the file transfer speeds achieved, the picture becomes quite weird, at least for me.

    I have the ethernet cards in both laptops set to auto-negotiate now. Checking with ethtool on the TW side, I see 1000Mb/s and full duplex (same output as reported above) - guess that should be fine.

    When any file transfer (copy using Windows Explorer) is initiated from the Windows machine, it runs at 110 MiB/s as expected. This does not depend on the transfer direction and not on how source/target partitions are formatted (ext4 or ntfs). This is as one would expect it to work.

    However, the slow transfer speeds are seen only when any file transfer is initiated from the Linux machine, using Dolphin/Krusader on TW and Thunar on Manjaro. No matter what I try, I get only 30-50 MiB/s, occasionally only 25, occasionally up to 55. This does not depend on the transfer direction. Maybe there is some dependency on what the file system is on the source/target partitions, ext4 or ntfs. This is UNexpected and not really acceptable.

    Almost needless to say: When copying large files from one place on the SSD of the Linux machine to another place on that SSD (all internal within the Linux machine), I see the expected SSD speed around 500 MiB/s.

    Any ideas?

  3. #3

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Next step: Just did an ethernet performance test with iperf3. The Windows machine can send 112 MiB/s to the Linux TW machine. The Linux TW machine achieves send rates of up to 100 or 105 (very rarely) MiB/s, sometimes down to 80 or so. So what does that mean now, and why do I get only 40-50 MiB/s file transfer speed on the TW machine (cf. all the above)?

    Edit: Remember that both machines achieve 110 MiB/s file transfer speeds when run under Windows.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Podunk
    Posts
    26,670
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Quote Originally Posted by 111MilesToGo View Post
    Doing a more systematic investigation into the file transfer speeds achieved, the picture becomes quite weird, at least for me.

    I have the ethernet cards in both laptops set to auto-negotiate now. Checking with ethtool on the TW side, I see 1000Mb/s and full duplex (same output as reported above) - guess that should be fine.

    When any file transfer (copy using Windows Explorer) is initiated from the Windows machine, it runs at 110 MiB/s as expected. This does not depend on the transfer direction and not on how source/target partitions are formatted (ext4 or ntfs). This is as one would expect it to work.

    However, the slow transfer speeds are seen only when any file transfer is initiated from the Linux machine, using Dolphin/Krusader on TW and Thunar on Manjaro. No matter what I try, I get only 30-50 MiB/s, occasionally only 25, occasionally up to 55. This does not depend on the transfer direction. Maybe there is some dependency on what the file system is on the source/target partitions, ext4 or ntfs. This is UNexpected and not really acceptable.

    Almost needless to say: When copying large files from one place on the SSD of the Linux machine to another place on that SSD (all internal within the Linux machine), I see the expected SSD speed around 500 MiB/s.

    Any ideas?
    Hi
    What tools on the windows machines are you using... bit like in windows when copying files to a USB device, it says it's finished but still see activity on the USB device...

    On the linux machine run something like atop and/or netatop to see what the real receive/transmit data is.
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
    SUSE SLE, openSUSE Leap/Tumbleweed (x86_64) | GNOME DE
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below... Thanks!

  5. #5

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Hi, thanks for coming in.

    I just looked at "simple" measurements when copying files from one machine to the other.
    On Windows: (1) the Windows Explorer "Copy" progress bar with details unfolded, i.e. that graph over time. (2) Task Manager > Performance with ethernet download/upload graphs.
    On Linux: Just all the file managers' progress information while copying, i.e. on Tumbleweed the Copying widget from Dolphin, on Manjaro the Copying window from Thunar.

    The iperf3 performance measures are accurate, I guess.

    Installed atop in Tumbleweed; YaST doesn't find any netatop. If I am reading the atop output correctly, then there is a line labeled enp0s25 (the ethernet NIC), which has "sp 1000Mbps" all the time and "so 440 Mbps" when I copy a large file from Tumbleweed to the Windows machine. I interpret this as the same 440 Mbit/s from T to W, when the Windows Task Manager at the same time shows an incoming rate of the same 440 Mbit/s. So this is the 55 MiB/s file transfer speed I was seeing at best.

    Hope my reading of atop is correct, and hope it might help you believe what I see.

    EDIT: Remark: Actually, I am not so sure anymore regarding M (=1,000,000) as decimal or Mi (with 1024's) in all the various displays. But anyway, I am looking at losing a factor of 2, not some few times of 2.4%).

  6. #6

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Tried to copy the upper part of the atop output:
    Code:
    ATOP - susytmblwdke8570                                           2019/09/02  17:08:40                                           --------------                                            10s elapsed
    PRC |  sys    6.94s |  user   7.44s |               |  #proc    266 |  #trun      2 |  #tslpi   635 |                | #tslpu     0  | #zombie    0  | clones    28  |               | no  procacct  |
    CPU |  sys      69% |  user     75% |  irq       7% |  idle    649% |  wait      0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 2.23GHz  | curscal  61%  |
    cpu |  sys       8% |  user      7% |  irq       6% |  idle     78% |  cpu005 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 1.85GHz  | curscal  51%  |
    cpu |  sys      11% |  user     12% |  irq       0% |  idle     77% |  cpu001 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 1.83GHz  | curscal  50%  |
    cpu |  sys       9% |  user     10% |  irq       0% |  idle     81% |  cpu003 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 2.40GHz  | curscal  66%  |
    cpu |  sys       9% |  user     10% |  irq       1% |  idle     80% |  cpu000 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 2.48GHz  | curscal  68%  |
    cpu |  sys       9% |  user      9% |  irq       0% |  idle     82% |  cpu002 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 2.39GHz  | curscal  66%  |
    cpu |  sys       8% |  user      8% |  irq       0% |  idle     83% |  cpu006 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 2.77GHz  | curscal  76%  |
    cpu |  sys       8% |  user      9% |  irq       0% |  idle     83% |  cpu004 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 1.83GHz  | curscal  50%  |
    cpu |  sys       7% |  user      9% |  irq       0% |  idle     84% |  cpu007 w  0% |  steal     0% |  guest     0%  |               | ipc notavail  | cycl unknown  | curf 2.30GHz  | curscal  63%  |
    CPL |  avg1    0.98 |  avg5    0.40 |               |  avg15   0.27 |               |               |  csw   411751  | intr   62325  |               |               | numcpu     8  |               |
    MEM |  tot    15.6G |  free    4.2G |  cache   9.4G |  dirty   5.3M |  buff  188.9M |  slab  381.1M |  slrec 219.0M  | shmem 109.7M  | shrss  16.4M  | vmbal   0.0M  | hptot   0.0M  | hpuse   0.0M  |
    SWP |  tot    18.0G |  free   18.0G |               |               |               |               |                |               |               |               | vmcom   4.3G  | vmlim  25.8G  |
    DSK |           sda |  busy     51% |  read    1022 |               |  write      4 |  KiB/r    511 |  KiB/w     23  | MBr/s   51.0  | MBw/s    0.0  |               | avq     0.00  | avio 4.96 ms  |
    NET |  transport    |  tcpi   49402 |  tcpo  375829 |  udpi       1 |  udpo       1 |  tcpao      7 |  tcppo      3  | tcprs      0  | tcpie      0  | tcpor      3  | udpnp      0  | udpie      0  |
    NET |  network      |  ipi    49403 |  ipo    16416 |               |  ipfrw      0 |  deliv  49403 |                |               |               |               | icmpi      0  | icmpo      0  |
    NET |  enp0s25  45% |  pcki   49326 |  pcko  375736 |  sp 1000 Mbps |  si 3311 Kbps |  so  450 Mbps |  coll       0  | mlti       0  | erri       0  | erro       0  | drpi       0  | drpo       0  |
    NET |  wlo1      0% |  pcki       5 |  pcko       7 |  sp  135 Mbps |  si    0 Kbps |  so    0 Kbps |  coll       0  | mlti       0  | erri       0  | erro       0  | drpi       0  | drpo       0  |
    NET |  lo      ---- |  pcki      72 |  pcko      72 |  sp    0 Mbps |  si    6 Kbps |  so    6 Kbps |  coll       0  | mlti       0  | erri       0  | erro       0  | drpi       0  | drpo       0  |

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Podunk
    Posts
    26,670
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Hi
    Try the command atop -n to also show what apps are using bandwidth.

    The netatop and netatop kmp (you need to modprobe netatop and start the netatopd service) are in my repo here;

    Project: https://build.opensuse.org/package/s...eneral/netatop
    Download: https://download.opensuse.org/reposi...leweed/x86_64/
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
    SUSE SLE, openSUSE Leap/Tumbleweed (x86_64) | GNOME DE
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below... Thanks!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Podunk
    Posts
    26,670
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Hi
    Just did some quick tests here, copying an iso image via scp and via Nautilus between two machines with 1Gb interfaces, both ways I see it peaking at around 720Mbps.

    Both machines are connected to a 1Gb switch both are using cat6 cable. If I switch to a cat5 cable I see the performance drop to 100Mbps as the remote machine switches down as expected.

    So what is your setup between systems? Routers, switches, cables etc?
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
    SUSE SLE, openSUSE Leap/Tumbleweed (x86_64) | GNOME DE
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below... Thanks!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Ca, USA
    Posts
    11,143
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Although what I wrote is more than 10 years ago now,
    It's all still completely relevant to what you are trying to do.

    https://sites.google.com/site/4techs...ork-connection

    A determining factor of course is whether you've set up a direct link unshared with any machines and whether you have any intervening devices in your network.

    If you have anything that might cause interference on the line (other machines, EMF emitting devices like elevators and other large motors, microwave ovens, etc), then modifying the TCP/IP Congestion Control algorithm can help. Distance , particular site to site or over WAN links can also be a factor a different algorithm can address.

    Otherwise...
    My article suggests numerous things you can implement to improve network performance...
    - Configure Layer 2 Jumbo Frames
    - Increase your TCP/IP sliding window sizes
    - Shift system resources to your networking, increasing buffers, more.

    I'd also note that you are introducing complications by transferring between MSWindows and Linux machines...you will have to know how both OS handles networking at a very low level to fully optimize, you should transfer only between same OS if you want to uncomplicate your variables.

    Additionally,
    If you're experiencing some extremely large performance deficit, although t's possible for a lot of little problems to add up, you should first look at a fundamental mis-configuration or connection... Like not enabling full duplex, a mis-configured intervening device like a switch, bridge or router, a bad connection or bad wire, not offloading to your NIC, etc.

    TSU
    Beginner Wiki Quickstart - https://en.opensuse.org/User:Tsu2/Quickstart_Wiki
    Solved a problem recently? Create a wiki page for future personal reference!
    Learn something new?
    Attended a computing event?
    Post and Share!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    12,497
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default Re: Workgroup LAN via ethernet achieves less than 50% of expected Gigabit speed between two PCs

    Maybe the problem is because NTFS is slow compared to other file systems.
    openSUSE Leap 15.1; KDE Plasma 5;
    testing Leap 15.2Alpha

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •