Smb is slow by design compared to nfs. /Leslie
Skickat från min Samsung Mobil -------- Originalmeddelande -------- Från: Andrea Venturoli <[email protected]> Datum: Till: [email protected] Rubrik: Re: Possibly OT: NFS vs SMB performance On 07/05/13 20:42, Terje Elde wrote: > On 5. juli 2013, at 18:18, Andrea Venturoli <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Is this normal in your experience? > > Did you do them in that order, or did you do the smb (slow) one first? > > If the slow was first, I'm thinking caching on the server could be a major > factor. Yesterday I did four test: _ SMB find resulting in over 10 minutes first time; _ SMB find resulting in nearly 10 minutes second time; _ NFS find resulting in a little over 1 minute first time; _ NFS find resulting in a little less than 1 minute second time. Today I tried again in reverse order: _ NFS find took 3 minutes; _ NFS find again took 21 seconds; _ SMB find took over 9 minutes; _ SMB find again took again over 9 minutes. So, while caching plays a role, it just isn't it. The server was possibly doing other things, so the above figures might not be that correct; however a difference in the magnitude order is just too big (and deterministic) to be considered random noise. bye & Thanks av. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]" _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
