latest max speed with Gigabit switch!

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:03:24 -0400, "Mike"
wrote:


"Geoff" wrote in message
.. .
Hello

I have connected the 1 Gigabit TP-Link switch and get odd results!

I have a Windows 7 Home Premium and a Windows XP Pro PC connected to
the switch and the ADSL modem/router also connected to it.

The Internet connections seems OK - download/upload speeds as normal
for both PCs.

But! When I transfer a 1GB file from the Windows 7 PC to the XP Pro I
see a transfer speed of approx 200KB/sec.

From the XP Pro to the Windows 7 I see approx 4MB/sec!

Why the different speeds and why are both speeds less than before
without the switch?!

Any thoughts?

Geoff

Can you borrow stuff and switch out? Possible culprits: NICs, cables,
switch, Win7.

If you haven't already, try this:

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/w...3-13f5a16b802d

More answers he
http://www.google.com/search?q=slow+...-8&oe=utf-8&aq

and he
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...copy+windows+7


Mike

Thanks for the links - no luck so far!

I have emailed a full description of the case to ADDON's Tech Support
and wait for their thoughts!

Geoff

Geoff wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:03:24 -0400, "Mike"
wrote:

"Geoff" wrote in message
...
Hello

I have connected the 1 Gigabit TP-Link switch and get odd results!

I have a Windows 7 Home Premium and a Windows XP Pro PC connected to
the switch and the ADSL modem/router also connected to it.

The Internet connections seems OK - download/upload speeds as normal
for both PCs.

But! When I transfer a 1GB file from the Windows 7 PC to the XP Pro I
see a transfer speed of approx 200KB/sec.

From the XP Pro to the Windows 7 I see approx 4MB/sec!

Why the different speeds and why are both speeds less than before
without the switch?!

Any thoughts?

Geoff
Can you borrow stuff and switch out? Possible culprits: NICs, cables,
switch, Win7.

If you haven't already, try this:

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/w...3-13f5a16b802d

More answers he
http://www.google.com/search?q=slow+...-8&oe=utf-8&aq

and he
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...copy+windows+7


Mike

Thanks for the links - no luck so far!

I have emailed a full description of the case to ADDON's Tech Support
and wait for their thoughts!

Geoff

Geoff wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 02:03:24 -0400, "Mike"
wrote:

"Geoff" wrote in message
...
Hello

I have connected the 1 Gigabit TP-Link switch and get odd results!

I have a Windows 7 Home Premium and a Windows XP Pro PC connected to
the switch and the ADSL modem/router also connected to it.

The Internet connections seems OK - download/upload speeds as normal
for both PCs.

But! When I transfer a 1GB file from the Windows 7 PC to the XP Pro I
see a transfer speed of approx 200KB/sec.

From the XP Pro to the Windows 7 I see approx 4MB/sec!

Why the different speeds and why are both speeds less than before
without the switch?!

Any thoughts?

Geoff
Can you borrow stuff and switch out? Possible culprits: NICs, cables,
switch, Win7.

If you haven't already, try this:

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/w...3-13f5a16b802d

More answers he
http://www.google.com/search?q=slow+...-8&oe=utf-8&aq

and he
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...copy+windows+7


Mike

Thanks for the links - no luck so far!

I have emailed a full description of the case to ADDON's Tech Support
and wait for their thoughts!

Geoff

Oops. Previous post got away on me :-)

I've been testing my gigabit setup here again today, and my results
are all over the place. I got as low as perhaps 15MB/sec and as high
as 70MB/sec. I'm getting better results using File Sharing, than
with FTP, which doesn't make sense to me. In some cases, I had
high CPU utilization. In other cases, low CPU utilization. I even
tried switching on Jumbo Packets, and it actually ran *slower*.
What a mess...

In terms of Jumbo Packets, I learned that my RealTek RTL8169
based (PCI) NIC, has a Jumbo limit of around 7000 bytes or so.
It actually can't do the 9000 number that my other NIC can do.
I used Wireshark, to verify it was actually sending a big packet,
and one in three data packets was close to the 7000 limit. But
even so, performance wasn't very good.

Today, I was testing with Ubuntu on one end, instead of Windows,
to see how much of a difference that would make. Right now, neither
OS really has me impressed. It almost feels like this stuff never
got tested or something. I don't think I'm ever going to see
"wire speed transfer" with the way things have gone so far.

Paul

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 07:25:01 -0400, Paul wrote:


Paul

'just to say that I had a reply from ADDON but they so far have only
given me links to drivers which I have already downloaded from the
realtek site .. I have used them but cannot get better than the
100Mbps setting ..

Cheers

Geoff

Geoff wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 07:25:01 -0400, Paul wrote:


Paul

'just to say that I had a reply from ADDON but they so far have only
given me links to drivers which I have already downloaded from the
realtek site .. I have used them but cannot get better than the
100Mbps setting ..

Cheers

Geoff

I've done some more testing, just to see what my hardware was capable of.

I have three brands of NICs, a Marvell, a Broadcom, and a RealTek.

If the RealTek is involved, I can transfer at 70MB/sec.

If the RealTek is not being used, I can achieve over 100MB/sec.

The program I used for test, was two Ubuntu LiveCDs and the
"rcp" command, which copies files to remote computer hard
drives. When using that command, my CPU utilization was around
10% (except for the laptop, which ran at 30% for at least
part of the transfer). The two Core2 computers would run at
around 10% during the transfer.

I got those results, without needing Jumbo packets.

The RealTek chip is sitting on the PCI bus, which isn't a good
choice, and I knew I could not get a super-high numbers that
way. But I should have been able to get a little over 100MB/sec if
the chip had been a good design.

The RealTek chip (RTL8169SC) is on a TPLink card I bought some months ago.
The other two example chips, are soldered to the motherboard.

When using other protocols, I can see between 15MB/sec and 70MB/sec
when the RealTek is being used. I can get a result as low as 3MB/sec,
if using SAMBA file sharing on Linux, but that is a SAMBA/SMB issue.
The 15MB/sec might be considered a realistic (low) scenario. I managed
to get 70MB/sec with pure Windows file sharing. But in terms of
CPU utilization, the "rcp" command seemed to be doing a
pretty good job. In Linux, while I was testing, the test file
was stored in RAM, in the /tmp directory. And the same, 1GB
sized file was used, as had been used in the previous
Windows+RAMDisk tests.

*******

Now, I haven't tested this yet, but there is a program here
that can be used for transfer rate tests. Since it doesn't write
the data to disk, this should be more of a pure network test.
You start a copy in receive mode on one machine, then start
another copy on a second machine in transmit mode. And then
the benchmark runs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ttcp

http://www.pcausa.com/Utilities/pcattcp.htm

You may also be able to boot up some Linux LiveCDs, and run
copies of the Linux version from there.

Paul

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:22:42 -0400, Paul wrote:

Geoff wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 07:25:01 -0400, Paul wrote:


Paul

'just to say that I had a reply from ADDON but they so far have only
given me links to drivers which I have already downloaded from the
realtek site .. I have used them but cannot get better than the
100Mbps setting ..

Cheers

Geoff

I've done some more testing, just to see what my hardware was capable of.

I have three brands of NICs, a Marvell, a Broadcom, and a RealTek.

If the RealTek is involved, I can transfer at 70MB/sec.

If the RealTek is not being used, I can achieve over 100MB/sec.

The program I used for test, was two Ubuntu LiveCDs and the
"rcp" command, which copies files to remote computer hard
drives. When using that command, my CPU utilization was around
10% (except for the laptop, which ran at 30% for at least
part of the transfer). The two Core2 computers would run at
around 10% during the transfer.

I got those results, without needing Jumbo packets.

The RealTek chip is sitting on the PCI bus, which isn't a good
choice, and I knew I could not get a super-high numbers that
way. But I should have been able to get a little over 100MB/sec if
the chip had been a good design.

The RealTek chip (RTL8169SC) is on a TPLink card I bought some months ago.
The other two example chips, are soldered to the motherboard.

When using other protocols, I can see between 15MB/sec and 70MB/sec
when the RealTek is being used. I can get a result as low as 3MB/sec,
if using SAMBA file sharing on Linux, but that is a SAMBA/SMB issue.
The 15MB/sec might be considered a realistic (low) scenario. I managed
to get 70MB/sec with pure Windows file sharing. But in terms of
CPU utilization, the "rcp" command seemed to be doing a
pretty good job. In Linux, while I was testing, the test file
was stored in RAM, in the /tmp directory. And the same, 1GB
sized file was used, as had been used in the previous
Windows+RAMDisk tests.

*******

Now, I haven't tested this yet, but there is a program here
that can be used for transfer rate tests. Since it doesn't write
the data to disk, this should be more of a pure network test.
You start a copy in receive mode on one machine, then start
another copy on a second machine in transmit mode. And then
the benchmark runs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ttcp

http://www.pcausa.com/Utilities/pcattcp.htm

You may also be able to boot up some Linux LiveCDs, and run
copies of the Linux version from there.

Paul


Paul,

I have made 2 Ubuntu LiveCDs and have tried using them - without
installing ubuntu.

Both my PCs get their IPs from the router and on each PC I can ping
both PCs and the router.

But! When I try to see the PCs on the network I see Windows Network
but cannot use that to see the other PC.

How do I make both PCs visible on the network?

Cheers

Geoff

Geoff wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:22:42 -0400, Paul wrote:

Geoff wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 07:25:01 -0400, Paul wrote:


Paul

'just to say that I had a reply from ADDON but they so far have only
given me links to drivers which I have already downloaded from the
realtek site .. I have used them but cannot get better than the
100Mbps setting ..

Cheers

Geoff
I've done some more testing, just to see what my hardware was capable of.

I have three brands of NICs, a Marvell, a Broadcom, and a RealTek.

If the RealTek is involved, I can transfer at 70MB/sec.

If the RealTek is not being used, I can achieve over 100MB/sec.

The program I used for test, was two Ubuntu LiveCDs and the
"rcp" command, which copies files to remote computer hard
drives. When using that command, my CPU utilization was around
10% (except for the laptop, which ran at 30% for at least
part of the transfer). The two Core2 computers would run at
around 10% during the transfer.

I got those results, without needing Jumbo packets.

The RealTek chip is sitting on the PCI bus, which isn't a good
choice, and I knew I could not get a super-high numbers that
way. But I should have been able to get a little over 100MB/sec if
the chip had been a good design.

The RealTek chip (RTL8169SC) is on a TPLink card I bought some months ago.
The other two example chips, are soldered to the motherboard.

When using other protocols, I can see between 15MB/sec and 70MB/sec
when the RealTek is being used. I can get a result as low as 3MB/sec,
if using SAMBA file sharing on Linux, but that is a SAMBA/SMB issue.
The 15MB/sec might be considered a realistic (low) scenario. I managed
to get 70MB/sec with pure Windows file sharing. But in terms of
CPU utilization, the "rcp" command seemed to be doing a
pretty good job. In Linux, while I was testing, the test file
was stored in RAM, in the /tmp directory. And the same, 1GB
sized file was used, as had been used in the previous
Windows+RAMDisk tests.

*******

Now, I haven't tested this yet, but there is a program here
that can be used for transfer rate tests. Since it doesn't write
the data to disk, this should be more of a pure network test.
You start a copy in receive mode on one machine, then start
another copy on a second machine in transmit mode. And then
the benchmark runs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ttcp

http://www.pcausa.com/Utilities/pcattcp.htm

You may also be able to boot up some Linux LiveCDs, and run
copies of the Linux version from there.

Paul


Paul,

I have made 2 Ubuntu LiveCDs and have tried using them - without
installing ubuntu.

Both my PCs get their IPs from the router and on each PC I can ping
both PCs and the router.

But! When I try to see the PCs on the network I see Windows Network
but cannot use that to see the other PC.

How do I make both PCs visible on the network?

Cheers

Geoff

Click the Google video link on this page.

http://screencasts.ubuntu.com/SAMBA_Filesharing

The first part of the video, shows how to use your Linux box as a client
of other computers which are sharing their files.

The second part of the video, shows how to set up the Linux box so it
shares files via SMB, with other Windows computers.

I've had occasional problems with getting sharing to work,
and sometimes if I'm using the Linux client to reach
a Windows box, the Windows box simple refuses to show up.
It seems to be related a bit, to the order the boxes
are booted in. So if the Windows box is already running
and serving files, and then you boot the Linux box,
that improves the odds that the PC will show up.

When things don't work on Linux, it can be things like a
firewall stopping it, but the firewall is turned off by
default. Things can also fail for a variety of
authentication issues. And getting usable documentation
on all the issues, isn't exactly easy.

When I tried to test Linux versus Windows, using SAMBA,
I didn't get very fast results.

*******

For todays results, I brought another computer out of
storage, as it has a good Ethernet interface. The CMOS
battery was flat, so I had to enter the BIOS settings
again, but at least the thing still works. I booted
Ubuntu, and stupid Ubuntu didn't autonegotiate to GbE
rates. I had to force it to 1Gigabit with ethtool.
That seems to be a long-standing bug.

From my Core2 machine, to either of the other good
machines, it runs 112.2MB/sec. From the other machines,
towards my Core2 (the one I'm typing on), then the rate
is 117MB/sec. I expect at that point, the rest of the
bandwidth is for the packet headers (ratio of packet
header to payload). So I'm not expecting to see 125MB/sec,
since the 125MB/sec is for the whole packet, which is
header plus payload data.

The test method was rcp or remote copy. For example,
this would send the test file from the local machine,
to machine "111". In Ubuntu, you install "rsh-client"
and "rsh-server" packages, as well as set up
~/.rhosts file with the IP address of the other
machine (part of authentication). rcp is not
considered a secure protocol, but is fine
in a LAN environment. It's only dangerous, if
third parties can "sniff" the traffic.

rcp /tmp/test.bin 192.168.123.111:/tmp/test.bin

I'm using the /tmp directory, because it's mounted on
RAM. But you have to be careful, not to send too large
a file, because the file transfer doesn't immediately stop
if /tmp runs out of room. I actually managed to
trigger the OOM killer on that Linux box that ran
out of RAM, and then had a mess to clean up. Using the
"top" command, "vmstat", or the system monitor from the
menus, you can get some ideas on memory usage. For some
reason, if you use "df" to check the max size of /tmp,
the value is larger than the actual RAM it is mounted
on top of, which seems a bit bizarre.

My guess at the moment is, that 117MB/sec user data,
is all I'm going to get. The rest could well be
overhead bytes. And that is using the rcp protocol.
I don't think FTP worked that well...

Paul