From: Miguel Medalha on

> socket options = SO_BROADCAST SO_KEEPALIVE SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
> TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY
>
>

It has been repeated "ad nauseam" that with modern kernels you shouldn't
use "socket options" unless you know very well what you are doing and
you have a very good reason for doing so.

Also, in my case I found that the following parameter had a big positive
impact in performance:

/|use sendfile|/ = yes

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

> /|use sendfile|/ = yes
>

Ooops! Something went wrong with copy/paste. Of course the option should be:

use sendfile = yes
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
From: live.fx on


Miguel Medalha wrote:
>
>> socket options = SO_BROADCAST SO_KEEPALIVE SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
>> TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY
>
> It has been repeated "ad nauseam" that with modern kernels you shouldn't
> use "socket options" unless you know very well what you are doing and
> you have a very good reason for doing so.
>
> Also, in my case I found that the following parameter had a big positive
> impact in performance:
> use sendfile= yes
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>

Thanks for answer, Miguel.
I use "socket options" because 99% places in Internet recommends this, and
no one say about "modern kernels" - really. You are first :) And of course,
this options not give me any visible effect.

I will try with "use sendfile = yes" but i`m not sure about this help..

Say me please, what transfer speed in the yours LAN ? Speed between Windows
clients and SAMBA server ? You have done some test? I ask this because i
can`t believe what SAMBA can do good transfer speed.
My test show me bad results -

Linux->Server FTP = 100 Mb/sec
Linux->Server NFS = 80-100 Mb/sec
Windows-to-Windows = 50-80 MB/Sec

Windows -> Server = 14-20 MB/sec. And this is my most pain :(
Linux -> Server (CIFS) = 10-20 MB/sec

Can you show me, how yours SAMBA work in Gigabit LAN ? What speeds ?
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Samba-3.5-slow.-Help-with-benchmarks-%21-tp27894473p27895918.html
Sent from the Samba - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

> I use "socket options" because 99% places in Internet recommends this, and
> no one say about "modern kernels" - really. You are first :) And of course,
> this options not give me any visible effect.
>
>

The problem with the information on the Internet is that it persists,
even if it is no longer correct. So, when you look for information there
you have to watch *when* was this information produced and whether it
still applies. And no, I am not the first to say that. If you search
this mailing list's archives for "socket options" you will find this
warning countless times: "*Don't use socket options* unless you have a
very good reason for doing so".
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
From: Miguel Medalha on

> Can you show me, how yours SAMBA work in Gigabit LAN ? What speeds ?
>

I can't measure them right now but I can tell you that I have 2 networks
consisting of Samba Domain Controllers serving only Windows clients and
the network speeds are very high. One of the networks is dedicated to
Desktop Publishing and the InDesign pages coming from the Linux/Samba
server appear on the Windows clients' screens like a sudden explosion.
Very fast indeed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba